Item # 10.
C033 CA Copyright © 2022 Tenant Technologies, LLC. Not to be reproduced without written permission. Revised 10/10/2022.
ADDENDUM TO RENTAL AGREEMENT
Property Name ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Unit # ____________________________________ Resident Name(s) __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Authorized Agent: The name of the person authorized to manage the property and act on behalf of the owner for the purpose of service of process and for the purpose of receiving and receipting for notices and demands is Cambridge Real Estate Services.
Rules and Regulations: The resident understands and agrees to abide by all of the terms and conditions listed on the Rental Agreement and all separate rules and regulations which are incorporated as part of this Agreement.
Early Termination Exception: The lease buy-out option does not exist during the initial lease term of a property operated under Section 42 of the IRS Code.
Unenforceable Provisions: The resident agrees that, if at some future date, a portion of this agreement should be judged unenforceable by a court of law, all other portions will remain in force.
Security Deposits: If the security deposit increases due to a change in the number of residents, the amount of the increase will be the responsibility of the remaining resident(s).
Delivery of Possession: Landlord shall not be liable to resident for failure to deliver possession at the beginning of the term if such failure is due to circumstances beyond the Landlord’s reasonable control, including the prior tenant’s failure to vacate.
Partial Payments: Partial rent payments will not be accepted.
Late Charges: A late charge totaling $50.00 will be charged if rent is paid after 5 p.m. on the 4th of the month. Exception: If the 5th of the month falls on a Sunday or a holiday, the late fee will be assessed on the next business day.
Babysitting: Except where otherwise allowed by local ordinance or housing program (i.e. Section 42 housing), operation of a commercial day care facility within an apartment must be disclosed to and approved by management.
Winterizing: The Resident shall comply with all reasonable requests made by the Landlord regarding the care of their apartment, including but not limited to directions regarding protecting the property against damage due to freezing temperatures; proper use of fixtures and appliances; and generally accepted housekeeping standards including but without limitation to cleaning supplies, techniques and frequency.
Barbecues: Barbecues: as of December 1st, 2022, no barbecue of any type may be stored or used on the Premises. This includes, but is not limited to, a resident’s porch, balcony, common areas, and parking lots.
Lockouts: As a company wide policy, we do not handle lockouts for residents. If a resident is locked out, they can obtain a key during business hours or, if after hours, must call a locksmith.
Transfers: A transfer fee may be required for any resident wishing to transfer apartments. In cases where the property is operated with Section 42 of the IRS Code, transfer requests may be denied.
Gardens: The resident must not cultivate any garden area or disturb any landscape without written management permission, except in designated areas.
Accessible Unit: If accessible unit is occupied by a tenant not needing the specially designed features of the unit:
= If I am occupying a specially designed accessible unit for disabled persons, and if I do not need such accessible features, I acknowledge that priority for such accessible unit is given to those disabled persons needing the special design features of this unit. I agree that I will be required to vacate the unit within 30 days of notification from landlord that an eligible individual requires the special design features of this unit. I further agree to move at my own expense (unless otherwise agreed by landlord in writing) within 30 calendar days of such written notice. I further understand that, if I move to an appropriate unit within the project, my rental rate will change to the rental rate for the unit I move to and this lease will be modified accordingly.
Resident further agrees to:
= Keep the apartment clean at all times, free of dirt and debris, especially those that can harbor mold, mildew spores or fungal growth
= Clean bathroom, kitchen surfaces and walls with projects which reduce or inhibit growth of mold, mildew or other fungi = Keep the humidity below 40% in the apartment
= Report to the landlord when any exhaust fan does not operate = Open multiple windows (weather permitting) at least twice a week for a minimum of one hour to allow cross ventilation of the apartment
= Notify the landlord of any mold grown on any surfaces inside the apartment, such as dark stains or patterns migrating through the walls or ceilings, and not attempt to disturb or remove any identified mold growth in the apartment unit without consulting the property manager
= Immediately report the discovery of the presence or indications of vermin such as accumulations of debris or feces. The resident agrees not to attempt to disturb or remove vermin in the apartment unit without consulting the property manager.
Cedar Park Apartments
Item # 10.
C033 CA Copyright © 2022 Tenant Technologies, LLC. Not to be reproduced without written permission. Revised 10/10/2022. Addendum = Page 2 of 2 _______________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________
RESIDENT DATE RESIDENT DATE
_______________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________
RESIDENT DATE RESIDENT DATE
_______________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________
RESIDENT DATE RESIDENT DATE
_______________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________
OWNER/AGENT DATE
= Allow the landlord to enter the apartment to inspect and make necessary repairs = Not modify or adjust any utility or mechanical systems in the apartment without prior written approval from the property manager. Apartment unit modifications and adjustments include, but are not limited to: sealing, closing or otherwise restricting the flow of ventilation or plumbing systems (including the installation/use of bidets); adding, removing or diverting any ventilation duct or plumbing lines; drilling, nailing, or otherwise penetrating walls, floors, or ceilings to a depth of more than one inch (i.e. where the penetration might contact plumbing or electrical lines or result in a loss of integrity) If Pets Allowed at This Property:
= Unless otherwise granted by management in writing, there shall be a combined limit of two pets, aquariums or cages per apartment. The maximum aquarium size shall not exceed 50 gallons and the maximum cage size shall not exceed 30 cubic feet. Maximum occupancy for each aquarium or cage shall be subject to approval by a qualified veterinarian. = Pets will not be allowed out of the unit except when being carried by Resident or when on a leash under Resident’s control. = Pets will be kept clean and free of pests. Pest treatments required due to pet owner negligence will be billed to the resident.
The pet will not be allowed to use any part of the property for depositing waste. Failure to clean up pet waste will result in a $50 fee ($5 at HUD properties) per offense. Should this occur accidentally, the pet waste will immediately be picked up, sealed in a plastic bag and thrown away. Any pet waste that is accumulated in a tray outside the apartment home will be disposed of promptly and properly.
= Pets shall not be kept, bred or used for any commercial purpose. = Puppy pads, or other pet training pads used specifically for collecting waste are specifically prohibited as they do not meet standards for housekeeping and can lead to floor damage. = Payment arrangements for the required security deposit may be made by satisfying an initial pet deposit of $50 and then paying $10 monthly until paid in full (HUD Elderly Properties Only). = See further information on the Pet Agreement.
Service Animals: The service animal(s) will be kept clean and free of pests. See further information on the Assistance/Companion Animal Agreement. Service animals will not be allowed out of the unit except when being carried by Resident or when on a leash under Resident’s control.
Gang Activity: Tenant agrees that tenant, any family member residing on the Premises or any guest or invitee shall not be a participant of gang activity or criminal activity on the Premises during the term of this Agreement. The term “gang” refers to a group, or a member of a group, of people who are involved in illegal activity or anti-social behavior. “Gang activity” includes but is not limited to:
= Wearing clothing, jewelry, or tattoos unique to gang affiliations (color alone is not sufficient to establish gang affiliation) = Grouping to show gang affiliation or to intimidate rival gangs or tenants, or = Claiming gang membership
Criteria for Exclusion of Non-Residents from the Premises: Any non-resident will be barred from returning to the Premises if that person:
= Makes unreasonable noise
= Engages in fighting or in violent or threatening behavior = Substantially interferes with any right, comfort or convenience of any resident of the Premises or employee of the Landlord = Engages in activity which constitutes a criminal offense = Engages in any activity involving firearms, illegal drugs or violence = Damages, defaces or destroys any property belonging to Landlord, any resident or any Landlord’s employees = Litters on the Premises
= Drives in a careless or reckless manner
= Consumes or possesses an open container of any alcoholic beverage on the common areas of the Premises = Engages in Gang activity (defined above in Gang Activity section) = Violates curfew ordinance for the City where Premises is located Notice: Pursuant to Section 290.46 of the Penal Code, information about specified registered sex offenders is made available to the public via an internet website maintained by the Department of Justice at http://www.megan’slaw.ca.gov.
Depending on an offender’s criminal history, this information will include either the address at which the offender resides or the community of residence and zip code in which he or she resides.
Item # 10.
VIOLENCE, DATING VIOLENCE U.S. Department of Housing OMB Approval No. 2502-0204 OR STALKING and Urban Development Exp. 6/30/2017
Office of Housing
Form HUD-91067
(9/2008)
LEASE ADDENDUM
VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND JUSTICE DEPARTMENT REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2005 TENANT LANDLORD UNIT NO. & ADDRESS
This lease addendum adds the following paragraphs to the Lease between the above referenced Tenant and Landlord.
Purpose of the Addendum
The lease for the above referenced unit is being amended to include the provisions of the Violence Against Women and Justice Department Reauthorization Act of 2005 (VAWA).
Conflicts with Other Provisions of the Lease
In case of any conflict between the provisions of this Addendum and other sections of the Lease, the provisions of this Addendum shall prevail.
Term of the Lease Addendum
The effective date of this Lease Addendum is ______________. This Lease Addendum shall continue to be in effect until the Lease is terminated.
VAWA Protections
1. The Landlord may not consider incidents of domestic violence, dating violence or stalking as serious or repeated violations of the lease or other “good cause” for termination of assistance, tenancy or occupancy rights of the victim of abuse.
2. The Landlord may not consider criminal activity directly relating to abuse, engaged in by a member of a tenant’s household or any guest or other person under the tenant’s control, cause for termination of assistance, tenancy, or occupancy rights if the tenant or an immediate member of the tenant’s family is the victim or threatened victim of that abuse.
3. The Landlord may request in writing that the victim, or a family member on the victim’s behalf, certify that the individual is a victim of abuse and that the Certification of Domestic Violence, Dating Violence or Stalking, Form HUD-91066, or other documentation as noted on the certification form, be completed and submitted within 14 business days, or an agreed upon extension date, to receive protection under the VAWA. Failure to provide the certification or other supporting documentation within the specified timeframe may result in eviction.
_________________________________________ __________________ Tenant Date
_________________________________________ __________________ Landlord Date
Item # 10.
EXHIBIT “C”
Item # 10.
Item # 10.
Item # 10.
Item # 10.
Item # 10.
Item # 10.
Item # 10.
Item # 10.
EXHIBIT “D”
Item # 10.
Item # 10.
Item # 10.
Item # 10.
Item # 10.
Item # 10.
Item # 10.
Item # 10.
EXHIBIT “AA”
(provided separately by appellant, added by City Staff)
Item # 10.
rnTil.
MULTIFAMILY NW
TheAssocia11011P1ornoungOu1''tvAentilHo\/$ing
CALIFORNIA
PARKING/CARPORT AGREEMENT CAMBRIDGE
real estate services
DATE PROPERTY NAME/ NUMBER_C_e_d_ar_P_ar_k_A~p_a_rt_m_e_n_ts C_A_2_1 0 __ RESIDENT NAME(S) _
UNIT NUMBER STREET ADDRESS
------- ---------------------------------
CITY STATE ZIP _
Check all that apply: ACCOUNTING □ No resident parking spaces are assigned. All parking is on a first come basis.
TOTAL DUE AT START OF RENTAL □ All residents must display a parking tag, sticker or other device supplied by Owner/Agent. □ Resident parking spaces are assigned. Resident has been assigned the following parking $ TO COVER RENT
space/carport number(s): (Space(s) may be reassigned per Rule FROM "n" on page 2).
□ The monthly fee for the assigned parking space(s) is $ and is due and THRU payable on the first day of each month.
□ The right to use the assigned parking space(s) is included in your monthly rent payment. LATE FEE:
□ Guest parking is not allowed on the property. $
□ Guest parking is allowed on the property only as follows: RETURNED CHECK CHARGE:
□ In spaces marked as "Guest" $ 25.00
□ In any unassigned parking space
DATE RENTAL TERM BEGINNING: □ Only those vehicles authorized by Owner/Agent with prior consent (guest tag provided) □ Other
Resident's Authorized Vehicles:
1. Make: Model: State: License Plate No.
2. Make: Model: State: License Plate No.
3, Make: Model: State: License Plate No.
4. Make: Model: State: License Plate No.
5. Make: Model: State: License Plate No.
Vehicles may not be substituted or changed by Residents without written notice from Resident and written consent from Owner/Agent.
Parking Tags/Stickers[ldentification (if agglicabl!:1): Parking identification for Resident vehicle(s) (i.e. tags, stickers or other devices) is in the form of: Resident acknowledges that parking identification has been provided by Owner/Agent. To be issued parking identification, Resident must present copy of proof of ownership and current vehicle registration. The parking identification is the property of the Owner/Agent, is not transferable, and must be returned to Owner/Agent at the end of Resident's tenancy. The fee for replacing lost or stolen parking identification is $ . This identification shall be clearly and visibly displayed in the vehicle in the following manner: . Whether guest parking is allowed and, if allowed, the method for identifying guest parking spaces or identifying authorized guest vehicles is described above.
RESIDENT UNDERSTANDS THAT OWNER/AGENT MAY HAVE A VEHICLE REMOVED FROM THE PREMISES WITHOUT NOTICE FOR FAILING TO DISPLAY THE PARKING TAG, STICKER OR OTHER DEVICE.
This agreement shall be in effect for the duration of Resident's occupancy and terminates upon termination of the Resident's tenancy. Owner/ Agent reserves the right to limit the type, size and number of vehicles per unit. 0 The person renting the parking space/carport is not a residential tenant of the premises. This agreement runs month to month and may be terminated with at least 10 days notice.
Violation of this agreement, California law, and any other posted rules regarding guest parking could result in vehicles being towed or immobilized and owners of vehicles being subject to violations and fines. Parking lots will be patrolled for the purpose of removing unauthorized vehicles by the following tow company:
Name Phone Number
Address
[If this information is left blank, name and contact information for tow company is posted on prominent signs on the property.] See Rules & Regulations on Page 2
X X
RESIDENT DATE OWNER/AGENT DATE
X
RESIDENT DATE
X X
RESIDENT DATE RESIDENT DATE
□ ON SITE □RESIDENT □ MAIN OFFICE (IF REQUIRED) PAGE 1 OF 2 g
~
"O
w
. -~
C[
:i.
0 iii
<I)
~ C[
w
a.
z
~
a'
;;:
>-
::,
0 I
>-
~
0 w
()
::,
0 0
C[
a.
w
C[
w
<D
0 >-
>-
0 z
g
~
O>
0 0
g "'
t 0
()
"' ()
.,
"' ~
E
~
Item # 10.
a.
b.
C.
d.
__, e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
Rules and Regulations:
Parking spaces are to be used only for parking vehicles. No storage of any kind is allowed in a parking space.
If a household has more vehicles than assigned spaces, the additional vehicles, if authorized, must be parked in "unassigned" parking areas. Any Resident vehicles not listed on page 1 must be parked off-site.
Owner/Agent does not guarantee the use of a parking space. Unassigned parking spaces will be made available on a first-come, first served basis.
Residents with parking identification must park in their assigned parking space(s) or in areas marked for resident parking.
Guest parking is for non-residents only. Resident's vehicles parked in guest parking will be subject to towing.
Motorcycles and mopeds must be parked in a parking space and registered as stated above.
Resident and guests are not allowed to park boats, commercial vehicles, trucks of one-ton and above, trailers and/or recreational vehicles without the express written approval of management, which is subject to space availability and restrictions.
The speed limit in the parking area and driveways is 5 M.P.H.
Neither the Owner nor the Agent accepts responsibility for the damage or theft of any of Resident's or Resident's guest's vehicles, or contents, or for injuries involving any vehicle in the parking lot. Owner/Agent shall not be responsible for personal property lost in or stolen from parking areas. Use of the parking areas shall be at the sole risk of Resident and their guests. Residents and Resident's guests should remove valuables and lock the doors of vehicles. j. Resident assumes all responsibility, indemnifies and holds Owner/Agent harmless for any damages or claims that may be caused by or arises out of Resident's (or Resident's guest(s)) use of parking areas. k. Residents must obey all California Motor Vehicle laws, traffic laws and posted signs. Residents may not park in handicapped parking areas (unless they have a valid handicapped permit), red fire lanes, visitor spots, on lawns or other common areas not designated for parking, or blocking entrances, thoroughfares, walkways and/or dumpsters.
I. No toxic, hazardous or flammable materials may be stored by Resident at any time in any vehicle or parking space. m. Resident(s) agrees to pay for any damages caused to the parking areas by the Resident(s) or their guests. n. Either party of this agreement may give a thirty (30) day notice to vacate a parking space which is assigned in this agreement.
Spaces are assigned on a month to month basis only. Owner/Agent reserves the right to change the location of Resident's assigned parking space(s) with 30 days written notice.
o. Resident(s) agree to keep their vehicle street legal, in good working order, licensed and insured, and must be in good repair which will be determined at the discretion of management. Vehicles leaking oil or other fluids must be repaired or removed immediately or this parking agreement may be terminated by landlord. Washing of vehicles on the property is prohibited unless a specific washing area is designated. No vehicle repair work is allowed on the property. p. Any violation of this Parking Agreement is a material noncompliance with the Rental Agreement. Failure to have proper and current registration of vehicles or parking of an unregistered vehicle on the property is a lease violation and a violation of this agreement. q. Owner/Agent shall have the right to temporarily close the parking areas or certain areas therein in order to perform necessary repairs, maintenance and improvements to the parking areas. r. The parking lots of the complex present substantial dangers because of the movement of motor vehicles. To ensure the safety of all residents, no one shall play in the parking areas.
Towing:
a) Owner/Agent may tow vehicles without notice to the owner or operator of the vehicle if the vehicle:
i) blocks or prevents access by emergency vehicles;
ii) blocks or prevents entry to the premises;
iii) violates a prominently posted parking prohibition; iv) blocks or is unlawfully parked in a space reserved for persons with disabilities; v) is parked in an area not intended for motor vehicles, including, but not limited to, sidewalks, lawns, and landscaping; vi) is parked in a space reserved for tenants and does not display a parking tag, sticker, identification or other device if required on page 1; or
vii) is parked in an assigned space and Owner/Agent has permission from the Resident to whom it has been assigned to tow the vehicle.
b) Owner/Agent may tow inoperable vehicles that are otherwise parked in compliance with this agreement after affixing a prominent 72 hour notice to the vehicle stating that the vehicle will be towed if it is not removed or otherwise brought into compliance with this agreement.
.,;
~
ul
]
-~
a:
z
0 '" Cf)
:IE
a:
w
<l.
z
w
i=
ii'
;:
1-
:::,
0 I
Ii:
0 w
(J
:::,
0 0
a:
<l.
w
a:
w
CD
~
ti
z
g
~
m
0 0
N
l!l
□ ON SITE □ RESIDENT □ MAIN OFFICE (IF REQUIRED) PAGE 2 OF 2
Item # 10.
EXHIBIT “E”
Item # 10.
Fall / Winter Announcement
Dear Residents:
On an annual basis, Cambridge Real Estate Services publishes this reminder regarding snow removal and snow management policies.
As you are aware, the Truckee / Tahoe region experiences significant snowfall during most winters. Cambridge site management offices have on-going communication with the Town of Truckee Road maintenance department. We offer the following input regarding Town standards for the most challenging periods of winter weather. • The Town of Truckee has an established response goal of 24 hours when snowfall reaches 24 inches; if snowfall is less than 12 inches in depth, response times are generally within 12 hours.
• The Town of Truckee coordinates emergency snow removal with the department of emergency services. Therefore, a near-immediate response for snow removal is often issued by local police, fire or medical services personnel if they are responding to an emergency during inclement weather.
• An established Town ordinance prohibits parking within the Town Right of Way along any public street. The Town has authority to ticket and/or tow any vehicle parked within the Right of Way. For purposes of Truckee Pines and Truckee Donner, the Right of Way is anywhere along any paved or shoulder areas of Estates Drive and Riverview Drive. For Henness Flats and Frishman Hollow, please avoid parking in any location other than a designated property parking lot; specifically, do not park along the public street called Rue Ivy Way which leads to Frishman Hollow. • The Town of Truckee has an established response goal which calls for substantially clear public streets within seven calendar days after the end of a significant storm.
With this letter we wish to advise all residents that our intentions regarding the clearing of snow at communities managed by our company will closely mirror these Town of Truckee standards.
During periods of heavy snowfall, As temperatures stay near the freezing level, the accumulation of snow in native areas will generally remain untouched. We elect to leave courtyards, wetlands and other non-essential areas of the property without snow management so that we can focus on other areas that are more commonly used by pedestrians and motor vehicles.
We thank in advance the vendors and employees who will be actively involved in snow removal and snow management activities during the coming weeks. These individuals often work long hours, under very challenging circumstances. They do so in order that we can maintain communities in a condition that causes them to be as accessible as possible. We appreciate their efforts.
Residents should be advised of our goals for the coming days. Specifically:
Item # 10.
Please be advised:
• Every effort shall be made to preserve access to each and every apartment on an uninterrupted basis. Apartments with multiple pathways for access may find that access is limited to just one pathway during peak snowfall periods. • Driveways and parking areas will be plowed as frequently as a contract service provider is able. We anticipate plowing will occur on an on-going basis. • Residents are asked to cooperate with snow removal efforts by avoiding the creation of any obstacles which would limit progress. Specifically, bicycles, toys and other personal property should not be left on walkways. Automobiles should be parked only in designated parking areas. We ask that residents not obscure or otherwise tamper with snow poles as these are important in defining the areas to be cleared. • For those of you who choose to clear snow on your own from your immediate and exclusive living area (such as patios, porches and so forth), we ask that you please shovel towards the buildings, so the driveway remains as clear as possible. This will allow for vehicles to get through easier until the snowplow is able to come through. • To avoid damage to vehicles, snowplow operators are obligated to maintain a safe clearance between the drive aisles they clear and the vehicles parked in close proximity.
If you find that the space between your vehicle and a cleared driveway is more than 24”, or if you find that driveway clearing resulted in excessive snow being shifted toward your vehicle, please contact the management office so we can respond as promptly as possible and assist.
From time-to-time management will also contract with seasonal employees to assist in snow management. These supplemental resources will provide us an opportunity to responded to even the largest storms of any given season.
Finally, in the event that temperatures drop well below freezing, we call your attention to the enclosed “Cold Weather Alert” notices. Your cooperation in helping us avoid the inconvenience and cost of frozen water lines is very much appreciated.
In advance, we thank you for your continued residency. We wish you a safe winter season and remind you that our best efforts are still at times tested by the whims of Mother Nature.
Sincerely,
Janeen Kallus
Cambridge Real Estate Services
Item # 10.
EXHIBIT “F”
Item # 10.
MEMBERS
FIONA MA, CPA, CHAIR
State Treasurer
MALIA M. COHEN
State Controller
JOE STEPHENSHAW
Director of Finance
GUSTAVO VELASQUEZ
Director of HCD
TIENA JOHNSON HALL
Executive Director of CalHFA
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
MARINA WIANT
901 P Street, Suite 213A
Sacramento, CA 95814
p (916) 654-6340
f (916) 654-6033
www.treasurer.ca.gov/ctcac
CALIFORNIA TAX CREDIT ALLOCATION COMMITTEE
DATE: April 25, 2024
TO: Low Income Housing Tax Credit Project Owners and Applicants FROM: California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (CTCAC) RE: 2024 Income Limits and Maximum Rents
On April 1, 2024, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) published the 2024 Income Limits applicable to low-income housing funded with Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) and projects financed with tax-exempt housing bonds. CTCAC utilizes the information published by HUD to calculate maximum rents and income limits for California LIHTC projects. The 2024 limits go into effect on April 1, 2024. Projects that Place-In-Service (PIS) on or after April 1, 2024 have a 45 day grace period in which they may choose to use either the current 2024 Income and Rent Limits or the prior 2023 Income and Rent Limitsfor lease up and determining the gross rent floor election (GRFE) for the property.
All properties that PIS on or after May 16, 2024, must use the 2024 Income and Rent limits.
The Housing and Economic Recovery Act (HERA) of 2008 made statutory changes to how income limits were calculated for projects. Prior to the HERA Legislation, income and rent limits were determined by HUD on an annual basis and were based on the Area Median Gross Income (AMGI) of the county the project was located in. Additionally, if HUD determined there was a decrease in the AMGI, the limits were “held harmless” at the level of the prior year. The HERA legislation changed the “hold harmless” determination of AMGI from an annual county level to a project level, based on the year the project placed in service (HERA Hold Harmless). Additionally, it gave an adjusted increase in the income limits (HERA Special) to projects in counties for which the AMGI had been determined to be held harmless in 2007 and 2008 (Impacted Properties). Please see IRS LIHC Newsletter #35 for more information about what constitutes “determined” and projects that were placed in service before or after the HUD income limit effective dates at the following link:
http://treasurer.ca.gov/ctcac/rentincome/09/irs_lowincome.pdf In California, there were initially seven designated HERA Special counties:
Marin
Nevada
San Francisco
San Mateo
Santa Clara
Item # 10.
CA Tax Credit Allocation Committee
2024 Income and Rents Limit Memo
April 25, 2024
Solano
Ventura
In 2010, HUD announced that they were creating the Multifamily Tax Subsidy Program (MTSP) Limits for all LIHTC properties going forward, separating them from the Section 8 limits, and eliminating the previous hold harmless policy. At that time, HUD also established a maximum and minimum amount that the AMI can change from year to year. The income limits issued for the Section 8 and MTSP programs will not increase more than 5% or twice the change in the national non-metro AMGI (whichever is greater), nor will the limits decrease more than 5%. With the change in policy, HERA Hold Harmless provisions apply to all projects that were placed in service on or after January 1, 2009, and all future projects. The elimination of the HUD hold harmless policy created separate income and rent tables, adjusted annually, based on the projects PIS date (Non-Impacted).
Impacted and Non-Impacted MTSP projects:
• Impacted Project – An Impacted Project is any project which had area median gross income determined in 2007 or 2008 under the HUD Hold Harmless policy, for which HUD has published a HERA Special limit and meets the following requirements:
1. Any single building project that Placed in Service on or before 12/31/2008.
2. Any multi-building project that had at least one building Place in Service on or before 12/31/2008.
3. Any acquisition/rehab project that has the date of acquisition on or before 12/31/2008.
4. Any rehab only project that had at least one building Place in Service on or before 12/31/2008.
• Non-Impacted – Non-Impacted MTSPs are projects that were not subject to the HUD Hold Harmless policy in 2007 or 2008, placed in service on or after January 1, 2009, or may not be affected by HERA Special Limits at this time. All non-impacted properties are still under the provisions of HERA Hold Harmless once they have placed in service and are subject to the 45-day implementation grace period. • For existing non-Impacted projects where the placed in-service date is 1/1/2009 – 5/1/2024, you would use the greater of the previous year (2023) or the current (2024) income and rent limits. o The Rent Limit is the greater of the current year (2024) or the gross rent floor election.
CTCAC will determine the gross rent floor election to be at carryover allocation for 9% tax credit projects or at preliminary reservation for 4% bond projects unless written notification is made by the owner to CTCAC specifying the gross rent floor election is to be at placed in service.
Changes to the Income Limits for Multifamily Tax Subsidy Projects MTSPs under HERA and subsequent legislation:
On March 23, 2018, the omnibus appropriations bill was signed into law, which included a change to Section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code allowing “Average Income Test,” under which a project may include units targeted up to 80% of area median income (AMI) as long as the project’s average targeting does not exceed 60% AMI. In 2018, CTCAC implemented regulation changes that allowed certain projects that would PIS in or after 2018, to change to the Average Income Test set-aside. The 2018 and all future Income and Rent limits reflect the averages from 20% up to 80%.
Item # 10.
CA Tax Credit Allocation Committee
2024 Income and Rents Limit Memo
April 25, 2024
2024 Income and Rent Limits:
One county in California saw a decrease in the AMGI for 2024, all other counties increased or remained the same. The county with a decrease is:
Calaveras
In 2024, CTCAC combined tables with duplicative information and the resulting four (4) income limit tables and four (4) rent limit tables are posted on the CTCAC website. 2024 Income Limits for Projects Placed in Service on or before 12/31/2008 (including HERA Special Projects)
2024 Income Limits for Projects Placed in Service from 1/1/2009 – 5/14/2023 2024 Income Limits for Projects Placed in Service from 5/15/2023 – 3/31/2024 2024 Income Limits for Projects Placing in Service on or after 5/1/2024+ 2024 Rent Limits for Projects Placed in Service on or before 12/31/2008 (post 1989) 2024 Rent Limits for Projects Placed in Service from 1/1/2009 – 5/14/2023 2024 Rent Limits for Projects Placed in Service from 5/15/2023 – 3/31/2024 2024 Rent Limits for Projects Placing in Service on or after 4/1/2024+ Note: for projects pre-1990 that use a per person based rent limit, please contact Compliance Section Chiefs Mayra Lozano at [email protected] or Elizabeth Gutierrez-Ramos at [email protected] to receive a copy of the 2024 rent limits.
All income limit tables reflect the current limits as determined by the HERA Special, HERA Hold Harmless, and MTSP guidance for 2009-2024.
Please note this memo provides summary information of published HUD guidance. Please review the entire Federal Register notice [Docket No. FR-5323-N-03), dated May 17, 2010, prior to determining which income limits and maximum rents are applicable to your project(s).
If you have any questions on the 2024 Rent & Income limit guidance, please contact Compliance Section Chiefs, Mayra Lozano at [email protected] or Elizabeth Gutierrez-Ramos at [email protected] or by calling (916) 654-6340.
Item # 10.
Per HUD Notice
Effective: April 1, 2024
One Two Three Four Five Six Seven Eight
County Person Person Person Person Person Person Person Person
CALIFORNIA TAX CREDIT ALLOCATION COMMITTEE
2024
For Projects Placed in Service on or before 12/31/2008
Including HERA Special Limits
Maximum Income Levels
MODOC
100% Income Level $61,600 $70,400 $79,200 $87,900 $95,000 $102,000 $109,000 $116,100 60% Income Level $36,960 $42,240 $47,520 $52,740 $57,000 $61,200 $65,400 $69,660 55% Income Level $33,880 $38,720 $43,560 $48,345 $52,250 $56,100 $59,950 $63,855 50% Income Level $30,800 $35,200 $39,600 $43,950 $47,500 $51,000 $54,500 $58,050 45% Income Level $27,720 $31,680 $35,640 $39,555 $42,750 $45,900 $49,050 $52,245 40% Income Level $24,640 $28,160 $31,680 $35,160 $38,000 $40,800 $43,600 $46,440 35% Income Level $21,560 $24,640 $27,720 $30,765 $33,250 $35,700 $38,150 $40,635 30% Income Level $18,480 $21,120 $23,760 $26,370 $28,500 $30,600 $32,700 $34,830 MONO
100% Income Level $65,400 $74,800 $84,100 $93,500 $100,900 $108,400 $115,900 $123,400 60% Income Level $39,240 $44,880 $50,460 $56,100 $60,540 $65,040 $69,540 $74,040 55% Income Level $35,970 $41,140 $46,255 $51,425 $55,495 $59,620 $63,745 $67,870 50% Income Level $32,700 $37,400 $42,050 $46,750 $50,450 $54,200 $57,950 $61,700 45% Income Level $29,430 $33,660 $37,845 $42,075 $45,405 $48,780 $52,155 $55,530 40% Income Level $26,160 $29,920 $33,640 $37,400 $40,360 $43,360 $46,360 $49,360 35% Income Level $22,890 $26,180 $29,435 $32,725 $35,315 $37,940 $40,565 $43,190 30% Income Level $19,620 $22,440 $25,230 $28,050 $30,270 $32,520 $34,770 $37,020
MONTEREY
100% Income Level $92,700 $106,000 $119,200 $132,400 $143,000 $153,600 $164,200 $174,800 60% Income Level $55,620 $63,600 $71,520 $79,440 $85,800 $92,160 $98,520 $104,880 55% Income Level $50,985 $58,300 $65,560 $72,820 $78,650 $84,480 $90,310 $96,140 50% Income Level $46,350 $53,000 $59,600 $66,200 $71,500 $76,800 $82,100 $87,400 45% Income Level $41,715 $47,700 $53,640 $59,580 $64,350 $69,120 $73,890 $78,660 40% Income Level $37,080 $42,400 $47,680 $52,960 $57,200 $61,440 $65,680 $69,920 35% Income Level $32,445 $37,100 $41,720 $46,340 $50,050 $53,760 $57,470 $61,180 30% Income Level $27,810 $31,800 $35,760 $39,720 $42,900 $46,080 $49,260 $52,440 NAPA
100% Income Level $102,800 $117,400 $132,200 $146,800 $158,600 $170,300 $182,100 $193,800 60% Income Level $61,680 $70,440 $79,320 $88,080 $95,160 $102,180 $109,260 $116,280 55% Income Level $56,540 $64,570 $72,710 $80,740 $87,230 $93,665 $100,155 $106,590 50% Income Level $51,400 $58,700 $66,100 $73,400 $79,300 $85,150 $91,050 $96,900 45% Income Level $46,260 $52,830 $59,490 $66,060 $71,370 $76,635 $81,945 $87,210 40% Income Level $41,120 $46,960 $52,880 $58,720 $63,440 $68,120 $72,840 $77,520 35% Income Level $35,980 $41,090 $46,270 $51,380 $55,510 $59,605 $63,735 $67,830 30% Income Level $30,840 $35,220 $39,660 $44,040 $47,580 $51,090 $54,630 $58,140 NEVADA - HERA Special
100% Income Level $79,300 $90,600 $101,900 $113,200 $122,300 $131,400 $140,400 $149,500 60% Income Level $47,580 $54,360 $61,140 $67,920 $73,380 $78,840 $84,240 $89,700 55% Income Level $43,615 $49,830 $56,045 $62,260 $67,265 $72,270 $77,220 $82,225 50% Income Level $39,650 $45,300 $50,950 $56,600 $61,150 $65,700 $70,200 $74,750 45% Income Level $35,685 $40,770 $45,855 $50,940 $55,035 $59,130 $63,180 $67,275 40% Income Level $31,720 $36,240 $40,760 $45,280 $48,920 $52,560 $56,160 $59,800 35% Income Level $27,755 $31,710 $35,665 $39,620 $42,805 $45,990 $49,140 $52,325 30% Income Level $23,790 $27,180 $30,570 $33,960 $36,690 $39,420 $42,120 $44,850 ORANGE
100% Income Level $110,500 $126,200 $142,100 $157,800 $170,500 $183,100 $195,700 $208,300 60% Income Level $66,300 $75,720 $85,260 $94,680 $102,300 $109,860 $117,420 $124,980 55% Income Level $60,775 $69,410 $78,155 $86,790 $93,775 $100,705 $107,635 $114,565 50% Income Level $55,250 $63,100 $71,050 $78,900 $85,250 $91,550 $97,850 $104,150 45% Income Level $49,725 $56,790 $63,945 $71,010 $76,725 $82,395 $88,065 $93,735 40% Income Level $44,200 $50,480 $56,840 $63,120 $68,200 $73,240 $78,280 $83,320 35% Income Level $38,675 $44,170 $49,735 $55,230 $59,675 $64,085 $68,495 $72,905 30% Income Level $33,150 $37,860 $42,630 $47,340 $51,150 $54,930 $58,710 $62,490
Item # 10.
Per HUD Notice
Effective: April 1, 2024
County Efficiency 1 BR 2 BR 3 BR 4 BR 5 BR
For Projects Placed in Service on or before 12/31/2008
Including HERA Special Limits
CALIFORNIA TAX CREDIT ALLOCATION COMMITTEE
2024
Maximum Multi-Family Tax Subsidy Projects (MTSP) Rents
for Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) Projects
Placed in Service after January 1, 1990 (post 1989)
NEVADA - HERA Special
100% Income Level $1,982 $2,122 $2,546 $2,942 $3,284 $3,622 60% Income Level $1,189 $1,274 $1,528 $1,766 $1,971 $2,174 55% Income Level $1,090 $1,168 $1,401 $1,619 $1,806 $1,993 50% Income Level $991 $1,061 $1,273 $1,471 $1,642 $1,811 45% Income Level $892 $955 $1,146 $1,324 $1,478 $1,630
40% Income Level $793 $849 $1,019 $1,177 $1,314 $1,449
35% Income Level $693 $743 $891 $1,030 $1,149 $1,268
30% Income Level $594 $637 $764 $883 $985 $1,087
ORANGE
100% Income Level $2,762 $2,958 $3,552 $4,102 $4,576 $5,050 60% Income Level $1,657 $1,775 $2,131 $2,462 $2,746 $3,030 55% Income Level $1,519 $1,627 $1,953 $2,257 $2,517 $2,777 50% Income Level $1,381 $1,479 $1,776 $2,051 $2,288 $2,525 45% Income Level $1,243 $1,331 $1,598 $1,846 $2,059 $2,272 40% Income Level $1,105 $1,183 $1,421 $1,641 $1,831 $2,020 35% Income Level $966 $1,035 $1,243 $1,436 $1,602 $1,767 30% Income Level $828 $887 $1,065 $1,231 $1,373 $1,515
PLACER
100% Income Level $2,064 $2,210 $2,652 $3,064 $3,420 $3,772 60% Income Level $1,239 $1,326 $1,591 $1,839 $2,052 $2,264 55% Income Level $1,135 $1,216 $1,458 $1,685 $1,881 $2,075 50% Income Level $1,032 $1,105 $1,326 $1,532 $1,710 $1,886 45% Income Level $929 $995 $1,193 $1,379 $1,539 $1,698
40% Income Level $826 $884 $1,061 $1,226 $1,368 $1,509
35% Income Level $722 $773 $928 $1,072 $1,197 $1,320
30% Income Level $619 $663 $795 $919 $1,026 $1,132
PLUMAS
100% Income Level $1,612 $1,726 $2,072 $2,394 $2,672 $2,948 60% Income Level $967 $1,036 $1,243 $1,437 $1,603 $1,769 55% Income Level $886 $950 $1,139 $1,317 $1,469 $1,621
50% Income Level $806 $863 $1,036 $1,197 $1,336 $1,474
45% Income Level $725 $777 $932 $1,077 $1,202 $1,326
40% Income Level $645 $691 $829 $958 $1,069 $1,179
35% Income Level $564 $604 $725 $838 $935 $1,032
30% Income Level $483 $518 $621 $718 $801 $884
Item # 10.
EXHIBIT “G”
Item # 10.
$1,368
$1,562
$1,722
Effective:
Expansive Patios and Decks
CEDAR PARK
Affordable Housing in Grass Valley, California
One of the best communities Grass Valley
has to offer!
Section 8 Vouchers Accepted
FEATURING THESE AMMENITES
Spacious Floor Plans Onsite Community Center
Abundant Closet Space Playground
Basketball Court
Dishwashers Convenient to Shopping
Gas Stoves
Maximum Annual Income
1 $47,580
Frost Free Refrigerators Beautiful Landscaped Setting
MAXIMUM HOUSEHOLD INCOME LIMITS
Number of Occupants
ANTICIPATED AFFORDABLE RENTAL RATES
2 $54,360
3 $61,140
4 $67,920
6 www.cresapts.com/cedarpark
[email protected]
Stackable Washer & Dryer Hookups
6/1/24
FOR INFORMATION CONTACT: PROFFESSIONALLY MANAGED BY:
Cedar Park Apartments
5 $73,380
210 Sutton Way, Grass Valley, CA
$78,840
3 4
*Lower rents may be available, depending on eligibility. Rents may also adjust upon finalizing utility allowances
7 $84,240
p 530.273.5010 l TTD 800.735.2929
Refundable Security Deposits will be based on information obtained during the screening process. All applications will be taken on a first come, first-served basis. Application fees are payable by check or money order. Applicants will be screened, with a non-refundable fee of $45, on the basis of meeting income qualifications, previous rental, criminal and credit history. Minimum occupancy standards may apply.
2 Number of Bedrooms Monthly Rent
Item # 10.
EXHIBIT “H”
Item # 10.
$1,368
$1,562
Effective:
265 Sutton Way, Grass Valley, CA
Number of Bedrooms Monthly Rent
www.cresapts.com/glenbrook
[email protected]
3 Phone: 530.273.5540 | 800.735.2929 TDD
6/1/24
FOR INFORMATION CONTACT: PROFFESSIONALLY MANAGED BY:
Glenbrook Apartments
Refundable Security Deposits will be based on information obtained during the screening process. All applications will be taken on a first come, first-served basis. Application fees are payable by check or money order. Applicants will be screened, with a non-refundable fee of $45, on the basis of meeting income qualifications, previous rental, criminal and credit history. Minimum occupancy standards may apply.
6 $78,840
2 *Lower rents may be available, depending on eligibility. Rents may also adjust upon finalizing utility allowances
7 $84,240
ANTICIPATED AFFORDABLE RENTAL RATES
3 $61,140
4 $67,920
5 $73,380
2 $54,360
Large Playground Onsite Maintenance
Convenient to Shopping
Number of Occupants Maximum Annual Income
Large Ample Closet Space
1 $47,580
Spacious Floor Plans Expansive Patios and Decks
MAXIMUM HOUSEHOLD INCOME LIMITS
Fully Applianced Kitchens Onsite Community Center
Washer/Dryer Hookups Beautifully landscaped Setting
GLENBROOK apartments
Affordable Housing in Grass Valley California
One of the best communities Grass Valley
has to offer!
Section 8 Vouchers Accepted
FEATURING THESE AMMENITES
Item # 10.
EXHIBIT “I”
Item # 10.
Oak Ridge apartments
Affordable Housing in Grass Valley
One of the best communities Grass Valley has to
offer!
Spacious Floor Plans Basketball Court
Abundant Closet Space Fenced Tot Lots
Electric Range BBQ/Picnic Areas
Cable and Phone Ready Community Center with
Meeting Rooms & Kitchen
Frost-free Refrigerator Covered Parking
Dishwasher Garages Available
Number of Occupants Maximum Annual Income
1 $47,580
2 $54,360
3 $61,140
4 $67,920
5 $73,380
6 $78,840
7 $84,240
8 $89,700
Number of Bedrooms Monthly Rent
2 $1368*
3 $1562*
4 $1722*
*Depends on household income and availability of apartments.
Refundable Security Deposits will be based on information obtained during the screening process.
All applications will be taken on a first come, first-served basis. Application fees are payable by check or money order. Applicants will be screened, with a non-refundable fee of $45, on the basis of meeting income qualifications, previous rental, criminal and credit history. Minimum occupancy standards may apply. Effective 04/01/2024 Oak Ridge Apartments
530.273.0996 or 800.735.2929 TDD
228 Sutton Way, Grass Valley, CA
www.cresapts.com/oakridge
[email protected]
Item # 10.
EXHIBIT “J”
Item # 10.
Cedar Park Tax Credit Worksheet
Tax Credit Calculation Worksheet Effective June 1, 2024 Property Details:
Allocation Year: Not on 8609 Funding Sources: Programs:
Placed in Service (PIS): 05/26/2004 LIHTC Investor LIHTC All units (one exempt staff unit) Demographics: Family State Agency CTCAC 17 units - 50%
Developer/GP/Owner: Oregon Investors VIII LP, A OR LP City Funds City of Grass Valley HOME Funds 63 units - 60% Partnership Name: Cascade Housing Association County Funds N/A HOME 5 - 2bdrm (Low HOME) Minimum Occupancy: 2-bed / 2 occupants 3-bed / 4 occupants (HOME only) Social Service Requirements: N/A 2 - 3bdrm (Low HOME) Minimum Lease Term: 12 Months (HOME) 1 - 4bdrm (Low HOME) CalHFA 17 units (50% set-aside)
Building Details:
Building Numbers Style Qty BINs
1 101-102, 201-202 2bd 4 CA-2002-854-01
2 103-106, 203-206 2bd, 3bd 8 CA-2002-854-02
3 107-108, 207-208 4bd 4 CA-2002-854-03
4 109-112, 209-212 2bd, 3bd 8 CA-2002-854-04 ADA Units
5 113-114-, 213-214 4bd 4 CA-2002-854-05 Mobility
6 115-116, 215-216 3bd 4 CA-2002-854-06 123 2bd
7 117-119, 218-219 2bd 5 CA-2002-854-07 111 2bd 111 2bd 8 120-123, 220-223 2bd 8 CA-2002-854-08 103 3bd 103 2bd 9 124-127, 224-227 2bd, 3bd 8 CA-2002-854-09 119 2bd 119 2bd 10 128-129, 228-229 4bd 4 CA-2002-854-10
11 130-133, 230-233 2bd, 3bd 8 CA-2002-854-11
12 134-137, 234-237 2bd, 3bd 8 CA-2002-854-12
13 138-139, 238-239 3bd 4 CA-2002-854-13
14 140-141, 240-241 3bd 4 CA-2002-854-14
Set-Aside Details
Size Sq Ft Staff 50% 60% Total
2/1 830 6 31 37
3/2 1002 1 8 23 32
4/2 1257 3 9 12
Total 1 17 63 81
Income Limits
LIHTC Effective Date: 4/1/2024 Location: https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/mtsp.html Household Size 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
50% 39,650$ 45,300$ 50,950$ 56,600$ 61,150$ 65,700$ 70,200$ 74,750$ 4-person 100% AMI 60% $ 47,580 $ 54,360 $61,140 $67,920 $73,380 $78,840 $84,240 $89,700 ***Use the lower of the limits for HOME units
HOME Effective Date: 6/1/2024 Location: HOME Income Limits - HUD Exchange Household Size 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
50% $ 36,500 $ 41,700 $46,900 $52,100 $56,300 $60,450 $64,650 $68,800 Rent Limits
50% Low Income Tax Credits LOW HOME 60% Low Income Tax Credits Size Gross UA Net Gross UA Net Size Gross UA Net
2/1 1273 -160 1113 1172 -160 1012 2/1 1528 -160 1368
3/1 1471 -204 1267 1355 -204 1151 3/1 1766 -204 1562
4/2 1642 -249 1393 1511 -249 1262 4/2 1971 -249 1722
***Use the lower of the Rents for HOME units
Utility Allowance Details Contact Details
Utility Allowances Provided By: The Regional Housing Authority Property Name Cedar Park Effective Date: 11/1/2023 Address 210 Sutton Way
Implemented Date: 2/1/2024 Address Grass Valley, CA 95945 Type Source 2-bed 3-bed 4-bed Tel: 530-273-5010
Heat Nat Gas 30 33 37 Fax: 530-273-9490
Cooking Nat Gas 8 10 13 Manager: Sonia Perez
Other Electric 80 104 129 Email: [email protected] A/C A/C 30 39 47 Website: #REF!
Hot Water Nat Gas 16 22 27 Property Supervisor: Janeen Kallus Other Nat Gas -4 -4 -4
Totals 160 204 249
Sensory
Item # 10.
EXHIBIT “K”
Item # 10.
Glenbrook Tax Credit Worksheet
Tax Credit Calculation Worksheet Effective June 1, 2024 Property Details:
Allocation Year: Not on 8609 Funding Sources: Programs:
Placed in Service (PIS): 5/23/2005 LIHTC Investor LIHTC all units (one exempt staff unit) Demographics: Family State Agency CTCAC 11 units - 50%
Developer/GP/Owner: Oregon Investors VII LP, A OR LP City Funds City of Grass Valley HOME Funds 40 units - 60% Partnership Name: Cascade Housing Association County Funds N/A HOME 5 - 2bdrm (Low HOME) Minimum Occupancy: 2-bed / 2 occupants 3-bed / 4 occupants (HOME only) Social Service Requirements: N/A 5 - 2bdrm (High HOME) Minimum Lease Term: 12 Months (HOME) 6 - 3bdrm (Low HOME) 4 - 3brdm (High HOME)
CalHFA 11 units (50% Set-aside)
Building Details:
Building Numbers Style Qty BINs
1 211-212, 221-222 3bd 4 CA-03-80101 ADA Units
2 311-312, 321-323 3bd 4 CA-03-80102 Mobility Sensory
3 511-514, 521-524 2bd 8 CA-03-80103 211 3bd 211 3bd
4 411-414, 421-424 2bd, 3bd 8 CA-03-80104 512 2bd 512 2bd 5 611-612, 621-622 3bd 4 CA-03-80105 713 2bd 713 2bd
6 711-714, 721-724, 731-734 2bd, 3bd 12 CA-03-80106 812 2bd 812 2bd 7 811-814, 821-824, 831-835 2bd, 3bd 12 CA-03-80107
Set-Aside Details
Size Sq Ft Staff 50% 60% Total
2/1 830 5 19 24
3/2 1002 1 6 21 28
0 Total 1 11 40 52
Income Limits
LIHTC Effective Date: 4/1/2024 Location: https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/mtsp.html Household Size 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
50% 39,650$ 45,300$ 50,950$ 56,600$ 61,150$ 65,700$ 70,200$ 74,750$ 4-person 100% AMI 60% $ 47,580 $ 54,360 $61,140 $67,920 $73,380 $78,840 $84,240 $89,700 ***Use the lower of the limits for HOME units
HOME Effective Date: 6/1/2024 Location: HOME Income Limits - HUD Exchange Household Size 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
50% $ 36,500 $ 41,700 $46,900 $52,100 $56,300 $60,450 $64,650 $68,800 60% $ 43,800 $ 50,040 $56,280 $62,520 $67,560 $72,540 $77,580 $82,560 Rent Limits
50% Low Income Tax Credits LOW HOME 60% Low Income Tax Credits 60% HOME Size Gross UA Net Gross UA Net Size Gross UA Net Gross UA Net 2/1 1273 -160 1113 1172 -160 1012 2/1 1528 -160 1368 1406 -160 1246 3/2 1471 -204 1267 1355 -204 1151 3/2 1766 -204 1562 1626 -204 1422 ***Use the lower of the Rents for HOME units
***Per HCD, High Home at Glenbrook must be calculated off the 60% Home Income Limits rather than using the HOME published HIGH HOME Rents Utility Allowance Details Contact Details
Utility Allowances Provided By: The Regional Housing Authority Property Name Glenbrook Effective Date: 11/1/2023 Address 265 Sutton Way
Implemented Date: 2/1/2024 Address Grass Valley, CA 95945 Type Source 2-bed 3-bed Tel: 530-273-5010
Heat Nat Gas 30 33 Fax: 530-273-9490
Cooking Nat Gas 8 10 Manager: Lorena Mackrill
Other Electric 80 104 Email: [email protected]
A/C A/C 30 39 Website: #REF!
Hot Water Nat Gas 16 22 Property Supervisor: Janeen Kallus Other Nat Gas -4 -4
Totals 160 204
Item # 10.
EXHIBIT “L”
Item # 10.
PROPERTY DETAILS:
1996 *The year the property was awarded LIHTCs Programs:
1/26/1999 *The first year qualified residents moved into the property LIHTC Extended Use Multifamily CTCAC #CA-1996-004
n/a
Partnership Name: n/a
Income/Rent at or below 60%; Avg. Affordability/Avg. Rents @ 45% n/a N/A n/a
Six months (LIHTC requirement) 4 Person AMI 104,200$
BUILDING DETAILS:
Building Style Qty of Apts
1 2BD, 3BD 8
2 2BD, 3BD 8
3 2BD, 3BD 8
4 4BD 4
5 4BD 4
6 4BD 4
7 2BD, 3BD 8
8 2BD, 3BD 8
9 4BD 4
10 3BD 4
11 3BD 4
12 2BD, 3BD 8
13 4BD 4
14 4BD 4
Total: 80
UNIT DETAILS:
Bed / Bath Sq. Feet Staff Apt 45% Units Total Apts.
102
2 x 1 830 - 24 24 N/A
3 x 2 1,002 1 31 32
4 x 2 1,218 - 24 24
1 79 80
INCOME LIMITS (BY HOUSEHOLD SIZE):
Area Median Income Effective Date: 4/1/2024 Nevada County Grass Valley CA Hshld Size 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
45% 35,685 $ 40,770$ $ 45,855 $ 50,940 $ 55,035 59,130$ 63,180$ 67,275$ 60% 47,580 $ 54,360$ $ 61,140 $ 67,920 $ 73,380 78,840$ 84,240$ 89,700$ Source: http://www.huduser.org/datasets/mtsp.html
MAXIMUM RENT LIMITS:
Max Rent Utility Allow Net Rent Max Rent Utility Allow Net Rent 2 x 1 $ 1,146 $ (160) $ 986 1 x 1 2 x 1 $ 1,528 $ (160) 1,368$ 3 x 2 $ 1,324 $ (204) $ 1,120 3 x 2 $ 1,766 $ (204) 1,562$ 4 x 2 $ 1,478 $ (249) $ 1,229 2 x 1 4 x 2 $ 1,971 $ (249) 1,722$ UTILITY ALLOWANCE DETAILS:
Utility Allowances Provided By: Nevada County Housing Auth Effective Date: 11/1/2023
Implement Date: 2/1/2024
Use Source 2 BD 3 BD 4 BD
Heat Natural Gas 30$ $ 33 $ 37
Cooking Electricity 8$ $ 10 $ 13
General Electricity 80$ $ 104 $ 129
A/C Ref Air 30$ $ 39 $ 47
Hot Water Natural Gas 16$ $ 22 $ 27 Tel:
Other Credit $ (4) $ (4) $ (4) Claifornia Climate Credit Fax:
TOTAL: $ 160 $ 204 $ 249 Manager:
Email:
Property Supervisor:
Allocation Year: Funding Sources:
Placed in Service (PIS): LIHTC Investor
Demographics: State Agency
Oak Ridge
Tax Credit Calculation Worksheet EFFECTIVE: April 1, 2024 Minimum Occupancy: Other
Minimum Lease Term:
Apartment Numbers BINs
Developer/GP/Owner: City Funds
Oregon Investors V limited Partnership County Funds
Set-Aside Restrictions: Other
D113 - D214 CA-96-00404
E15 - E216 CA-96-00405
F117 - F218 CA-96-00406
A101 - A204 CA-96-00401
B105 - B208 CA-96-00402
C109 - C212 CA-96-00403
K129 - K230 CA-96-00410
L131 - L232 CA-96-00411
M133 - M236 CA-96-00412
G121 - G224 CA-96-00407
H125 - H228 CA-96-00408
J119 - J220 CA-96-00409
Mobility Adapted Dwellings:
Sensory Adapted Dwellings:
N137 - N238 CA-96-00413
P139 - P240 CA-96-00414
Total Quantity:
45% of Area Median Income (AMI) 60% of Area Median Income (AMI) For more information, please contact:
Oak Ridge
228 Sutton Way
Oak Ridge is a unique property which requires that the group of all units, at the time of move-in, have an average household income equal to 45% or less of Area Median Income (AMI). And, throughout the term of tenancy for all households, all rents at the property must also be at or below an average of 45% of AMI. Refer to Tax Credit Schedule prepared each month to verify these requirements are being met.
Grass Valley, CA 95945
530.273.0996
530.273.0896
William Kilburn
[email protected]
Janeen Kallus
Item # 10.
EXHIBIT “M”
Item # 10.
A. Limit as provided through participation in the earthquake and flood DIC policy coverage offered through the Agency, or.
B. For new proposed projects, application to Multifamily Programs underwriting for a waiver.
C. For projects not covered by the Agency policy or granted a waiver, total replacement value (building replacement cost plus business interruption value) with no coinsurance penalty provision.
Blanket earthquake insurance policies will be considered on a case by case basis.
6. Boiler & Machinery: $1,000,000.
Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions
Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by CalHF A. At the option the CalHFA, either: the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects CalHFA, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the owner shall provide a financial guarantee satisfactory to CalHF A guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the owner may select deductibles no greater than $10,000 per occurrence on Property and Boiler & Machinery coverages, and no greater than 5% of the values per building per location at the time and place of the loss per occurrence on Earthquake and Flood coverages.
Other Insurance Provisions
With respect to Property and Earthquake and Flood coverage, the Agency's interest shall be protected by a Lenders Loss Payable Endorsement naming the Agency as "Loss Payee." Crime Coverage: The Agency recommends, but does not require owner to carry insurance covering money or other property against burglary, robbery or theft.
Directors and Officers: The Agency recommends but does not require liability insurance for directors and officers of non-profit boards.
The general liability policy is to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
1. The owner's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the Agency shall be excess of the owner's insurance and shall not contribute with it
Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be canceled, reduced or modified except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the Agency.
CaIHFA.TEX.RA Cedar Park
12J8J2004.PAB/mnm-#113704vlFINAL -23- Page 161
Item # 6.
Item # 10.
Acceptability of Insurers
Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A: vn or an S&P rating of AA.
Vetification oj Coverage
Policies must be-acquired at initial occupancy and a certificate of insurance must be submitted to the Agency approval 45 days to permanent loan recordation. Renewal insurance certificates must be submitted 30 days prior to the expiration date of any current certificate.
Impounds
At the time of permanent loan closing, the Agency will establish insurance impounds CaIHFA.TEX.RA Cedar Park
12I8I2004.P AB/mnm-# I I3704v IFINAL -24- Page 162
Item # 6.
Item # 10.
EXHIBIT “N”
Item # 10.
EXHIBITB
CALIFORNIA HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY
INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
FOR CALIFORNIA HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY DEVELOPMENTS
Owner shall procure and maintain for the duration of the loan, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property, which may arise from or in connection with the owners operation of the premises to which this contract applies.
Minimum Scope of Insurance
Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
1, Property insurance against the perils of fire, "extended coverage", vandalism, and malicious mischief to real property and business income (rents).
2. If not granted a waiver, Property insurance against the perils of earthquake and flood for both real property and business income (rents) (may be purchased through CalHFA). }. Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence Form ce ooou
4, Insurance Services Office Form Number CA 0001 covering Automobile Liability. Code 1 (any auto).
5. Workers Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance.
6. Boiler and Machinery coverage against standard "broad form" perils.
Minimum Limits of Insurance
Owner shall maintain limits no less than:
L Property Insurance: Full replacement cost with no coinsurance penalty provision for real property, and at least the annual gross potential rental income for the development for business interruption coverage.
2. General Liability: (Including operations, products and completed operations.) $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit.
CalHFARA.TEX.NRSGlenbrook Apta.
1/9!2006.NDSljaf-#124034v2 -23-
Item # 6.
Item # 10.
3. Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage.
4. Employer's Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease.
5. Earthquake and Flood:
(a) Limit as provided through participation in the earthquake and flood DIC policy coverage offered through the Agency, or.
(b) For new proposed projects, application to Multifamily Programs underwriting for a waiver.
(c) For projects not covered by the Agency policy or granted a waiver, total replacement value (building replacement cost plus business interruption value) with no coinsurance penalty provision.
Blanket earthquake insurance policies will be considered on a case by case basis.
6. Boiler & Machinery: $1,000,000.
Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions
Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by CalHFA. At the option of the CaIHFA, either: the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or selfinsured retentions as respects CalHFA, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the owner shall provide a financial guarantee satisfactory to CalHFA guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the owner may select deductibles no greater than $10,000 per occurrence on Property and Boiler & Machinery coverages, and no greater than 5% of the values per building per location at the time and place of the loss per occurrence on Earthquake and Flood coverages.
Other Insurance Provisions
With respect to Property and Earthquake and Flood coverage, the Agency's interest shall be protected by a Lenders Loss Payable Endorsement naming the Agency as "Loss Payee." Crime Coverage: The Agency recommends, but does not require owner to carry insurance covering money or other property against burglary, robbery or theft.
Directors and Officers: The Agency recommends but does not require liability insurance for directors and officers of non-profit boards.
The general liability policy is to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
CaIHFARA.TEX.NRSGlenbrook Apls.
1I9/2006.NDS/jaf-#124034v2 -24-
Item # 6.
Item # 10.
1 The owner's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance. Any insurance or selfinsurance maintained by the Agency shall be excess of the owner's insurance and shall not contribute with it.
2. Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be canceled, reduced or modified except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the Agency.
3. The Agency, its officers, officials, and employees are to be covered as additional insureds with respect to liability arising out of ownership, maintenance or use of the premises.
Acceptability of Insurers
Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A: vn or an S&P rating of AA.
Verification of Coverage
Policies must be acquired at initial occupancy and a certificate of insurance must be submitted to the Agency for approval 45 days prior to permanent loan recordation. Renewal insurance certificates must be submitted 30 days prior to the expiration date of any current certificate.
Impounds
At the time of permanent loan closing, the Agency will establish insurance impounds.
CaIHFARA.TEX.NRSGlenbrook Apts.
1/9!2006.NDSljaf-#124034v2 -25-
Item # 6.
Item # 10.
EXHIBIT “O”
Item # 10.
MULTIFAMILY LOAN AND SECURITY AGREEMENT
(NON-RECOURSE)
BY AND BETWEEN
OREGON INVESTORS V LIMITED PARTNERSHIP,
an Oregon limited partnership
AND
BERKELEY POINT CAPITAL LLC,
a Delaware limited liability company
DATED AS OF
May 30, 2014
~ FannieMae,,
Item # 10.
written notice or the passage of time, or both, would constitute an Event of Default has occurred and is continuing). Borrower shall cooperate with Lender in order to satisfy the provisions of this Section 8.03(a). All related costs and expenses of Lender shall become immediately due and payable within ten (10) Business Days after demand therefor. (b) Credit Reports; Credit Score.
No more often than once in any twelve (12) month period, Lender is authorized to obtain a credit report (if applicable) on Borrower or Guarantor, the cost of which report shall be paid by Borrower. Lender is authorized to obtain a Credit Score (if applicable) for Borrower or Guarantor at any time at Lender's expense.
ARTICLE 9 - INSURANCE
Section 9.01 Representations and Warranties.
The representations and warranties made by Borrower to Lender in this Section 9.01 are made as of the Effective Date and are true and correct except as disclosed on the Exceptions to Representations and Warranties Schedule.
(a) Compliance with Insurance Requirements.
Borrower is in compliance with Lender's insurance requirements ( or has obtained a written waiver from Lender for any non-compliant coverage) and has timely paid all premiums on all required insurance policies.
(b) Property Condition.
(1) The Mortgaged Property has not been damaged by fire, water, wind, or other cause of loss; or
(2) if previously damaged, any previous damage to the Mortgaged Property has been repaired and the Mortgaged Property has been fully restored.
Section 9.02 Covenants.
(a) Insurance Requirements.
( 1) As required by Lender and applicable law, and as may be modified from time to time, Borrower shall:
(A) keep the hnprovements insured at all times against any hazards, which insurance shall include coverage against loss by fire and all other perils insured by the "special causes of loss" coverage form, general boiler and machinery coverage, business income coverage, and flood (if any of the hnprovements are located in an area identified by the Federal Emergency Multifamily Loan and Security Agreement
(Non-Recourse) Form 6001.NR
08-13
Page40
Article 8 © 2013 Fannie Mae
Item # 10.
Management Agency (or any successor) as an area having special flood hazards and to the extent flood insurance is available in that area), and may include sinkhole insurance, mine subsidence insurance, earthquake insurance, terrorism insurance, windstorm insurance and, if the Mortgaged Property does not conform to applicable building, zoning, or land use laws, ordinance, and law coverage; (B) maintain at all times commercial general liability insurance, workmen's compensation insurance, and such other liability, errors and omissions, and fidelity insurance coverage; and
(C) maintain builder's risk and public liability insurance, and other insurance in connection with completing the Repairs or Replacements, as applicable.
(b) Delivery of Policies, Renewals, Notices, and Proceeds.
Borrower shall:
( 1) cause all insurance policies (including any policies not otherwise required by Lender) which can be endorsed with standard non-contributing, non-reporting mortgagee clauses making loss payable to Lender ( or Lender's assigns) to be so endorsed;
(2) promptly deliver to Lender a copy of all renewal and other notices received by Borrower with respect to the policies and all receipts for paid premiums; (3) deliver evidence, in form and content acceptable to Lender, that each required insurance policy under this Article 9 has been renewed not less than fifteen (15) days prior to the applicable expiration date, and (if such evidence is other than an original or duplicate original of a renewal policy) deliver the original or duplicate original of each renewal policy ( or such other evidence of insurance as may be required by or acceptable to Lender) in form and content acceptable to Lender within ninety (90) days after the applicable expiration date of the original insurance policy; (4) provide immediate written notice to the insurance company and to Lender of any event of loss;
(5) execute such further evidence of assignment of any insurance proceeds as Lender may require; and
(6) provide immediate written notice to Lender of Borrower's receipt of any insurance proceeds under any insurance policy required by Section 9.02(a)(l)(A) above and, if requested by Lender, deliver to Lender all of such proceeds received by Borrower to be applied by Lender in accordance with this Article 9.
Multifamily Loan and Security Agreement
(Non-Recourse) Form 6001.NR
08-13
Article 9 © 2013 Fannie Mae
Item # 10.
Section 9.03 Mortgage Loan Administration Matters Regarding Insurance (a) Lender's Ongoing Insurance Requirements.
Borrower acknowledges that Lender's insurance requirements may change from time to time. All insurance policies and renewals of insurance policies required by this Loan Agreement shall be:
(1) in the form and with the terms required by Lender;
(2) in such amounts, with such maximum deductibles and for such periods required by Lender; and
(3) issued by insurance companies satisfactory to Lender.
BORROWER ACKNOWLEDGES THAT ANY FAILURE OF BORROWER TO
COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS SET FORTH IN SECTION 9.02(a) OR SECTION
9.02(b)(3) ABOVE SHALL PERMIT LENDER TO PURCHASE THE APPLICABLE INSURANCE AT BORROWER'S COST. SUCH INSURANCE MAY, BUT NEED NOT, PROTECT BORROWER'S INTERESTS. THE COVERAGE THAT LENDER PURCHASES
MAY NOT PAY ANY CLAIM THAT BORROWER MAKES OR ANY CLAIM THAT IS MADE AGAINST BORROWER IN CONNECTION WITH THE MORTGAGED PROPERTY.
IF LENDER PURCHASES INSURANCE FOR THE MORTGAGED PROPERTY AS
PERMITTED HEREUNDER, BORROWER WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE COSTS OF
THAT INSURANCE, INCLUDING INTEREST AT THE DEFAULT RATE AND ANY
OTHER CHARGES LENDER MAY IMPOSE IN CONNECTION WITH THE PLACEMENT
OF THE INSURANCE UNTIL THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE CANCELLATION OR THE EXPIRATION OF THE INSURANCE. THE COSTS OF THE INSURANCE SHALL BE
ADDED TO BORROWER'S TOTAL OUTSTANDING BALANCE OR OBLIGATION AND SHALL CONSTITUTE ADDITIONAL INDEBTEDNESS. THE COSTS OF THE
INSURANCE MAY BE MORE THAN THE COST OF INSURANCE BORROWER MAY BE ABLE TO OBTAIN ON ITS OWN. BORROWER MAY LATER CANCEL ANY
INSURANCE PURCHASED BY LENDER, BUT ONLY AFTER PROVIDING EVIDENCE
THAT BORROWER HAS OBTAINED INSURANCE AS REQUIRED BY THIS LOAN AGREEMENT AND THE OTHER LOAN DOCUMENTS.
(b) Application of Proceeds on Event of Loss.
(1) Upon an event of loss, Lender may, at Lender's option:
(A) hold such proceeds to be applied to reimburse Borrower for the cost of Restoration (in accordance with Lender's then-current policies relating to the restoration of casualty damage on similar multifamily residential properties); or
Multifamily Loan and Security Agreement
(Non-Recourse) Form 6001.NR
08-13
Page42
Article 9 © 2013 Fannie Mae
Item # 10.
(B) apply such proceeds to the payment of the Indebtedness, whether or not then due; provided, however, Lender shall not apply insurance proceeds to the payment of the Indebtedness and shall permit Restoration pursuant to Section 9 .03(b )( 1 )(A) if all of the following conditions are met:
(i) no Event of Default has occurred and is continuing (or any event which, with the giving of written notice or the passage of time, or both, would constitute an Event of Default has occurred and is continuing);
(ii) Lender determines that the combination of insurance proceeds and amounts provided by Borrower will be sufficient funds to complete the Restoration;
(iii) Lender determines that the net operating income generated by the Mortgaged Property after completion of the Restoration will be sufficient to support a debt service coverage ratio not less than the debt service coverage ratio immediately prior to the event of loss, but in no event less than 1.0x (the debt service coverage ratio shall be calculated on a thirty (30) year amortizing basis (if applicable, on a proforma basis approved by Lender) in all events and shall include all operating costs and other expenses, Imposition Deposits, deposits to Collateral Accounts, and Mortgage Loan repayment obligations);
(iv) Lender determines that the Restoration will be
completed before the earlier of (1) one year before the stated Maturity Date, or (2) one year after the date of the loss or casualty; and (v) Borrower provides Lender, upon written request, evidence of the availability during and after the Restoration of the insurance required to be maintained by Borrower pursuant to this Loan Agreement.
After the completion of Restoration in accordance with the above requirements, as determined by Lender, the balance, if any, of such proceeds shall be returned to Borrower.
(2) Notwithstanding the foregoing, if any loss is estimated to be in an amount equal to or less than $50,000, Lender shall not exercise its rights and remedies as powerof-attorney herein and shall allow Borrower to make proof of loss, to adjust and compromise any claims under policies of property damage insurance, to appear in and prosecute any action arising from such policies of property damage insurance, and to collect and receive the proceeds of property damage insurance; provided that each of the following conditions shall be satisfied:
(A) Borrower shall immediately notify Lender of the casualty giving rise to the claim;
Multifamily Loan and Security Agreement
(Non-Recourse) Form 6001.NR
08-13
Article 9 © 2013 Fannie Mae
Item # 10.
(B) no Event of Default has occurred and is continuing (or any event which, with the giving of written notice or the passage of time, or both, would constitute an Event of Default has occurred and is continuing); (C) the Restoration will be completed before the earlier of (i) one year before the stated Maturity Date, or (ii) one year after the date of the loss or casualty;
(D) Lender determines that the combination of insurance proceeds and amounts provided by Borrower will be sufficient funds to complete the Restoration;
(E) all proceeds of property damage insurance shall be issued in the form of joint checks to Borrower and Lender;
(F) all proceeds of property damage insurance shall be applied to the Restoration;
(G) Borrower shall deliver to Lender evidence satisfactory to Lender of completion of the Restoration and obtainment of all lien releases; (H) Borrower shall have complied to Lender's satisfaction with the foregoing requirements on any prior claims subject to this provision, if any; and (I) Lender shall have the right to inspect the Mortgaged Property (subject to the rights of tenants under the Leases).
(3) If Lender elects to apply insurance proceeds to the Indebtedness in accordance with the terms of this Loan Agreement, Borrower shall not be obligated to restore or repair the Mortgaged Property. Rather, Borrower shall restrict access to the damaged portion of the Mortgaged Property and, at its expense and regardless of whether such costs are covered by insurance, clean up any debris resulting from the casualty event, and, if required or otherwise permitted by Lender, demolish or raze any remaining part of the damaged Mortgaged Property to the extent necessary to keep and maintain the Mortgaged Property in a safe, habitable, and marketable condition. Nothing in this Section 9.03(b) shall affect any of Lender's remedial rights against Borrower in connection with a breach by Borrower of any of its obligations under this Loan Agreement or under any Loan Document, including any failure to timely pay Monthly Debt Service Payments or maintain the insurance coverage(s) required by this Loan Agreement.
(c) Payment Obligations Unaffected.
The application of any insurance proceeds to the Indebtedness shall not extend or postpone the Maturity Date, or the due date or the full payment of any Monthly Debt Service Payment, Monthly Replacement Reserve Deposit, or any other installments referred to in this Multifamily Loan and Security Agreement
(Non-Recourse)
Article 9
Form 6001.NR
08-13
Page44
© 2013 Fannie Mae
Item # 10.
Loan Agreement or in any other Loan Document. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if Lender applies insurance proceeds to the Indebtedness in connection with a casualty of less than the entire Mortgaged Property, and after such application of proceeds the debt service coverage ratio (as determined by Lender) is less than l.25x based on the then-applicable Monthly Debt Service Payment and the anticipated on-going net operating income of the Mortgaged Property after such casualty event, then Lender may, at its discretion, permit an adjustment to the Monthly Debt Service Payments that become due and owing thereafter, based on Lender's then-current underwriting requirements. In no event shall the preceding sentence obligate Lender to make any adjustment to the Monthly Debt Service Payments.
(d) Foreclosure Sale.
If the Mortgaged Property is transferred pursuant to a Foreclosure Event or Lender otherwise acquires title to the Mortgaged Property, Borrower acknowledges that Lender shall automatically succeed to all rights of Borrower in and to any insurance policies and unearned insurance premiums applicable to the Mortgaged Property and in and to the proceeds resulting from any damage to the Mortgaged Property prior to such Foreclosure Event or such acquisition. (e) Appointment of Lender as Attorney-In-Fact.
Borrower hereby authorizes and appoints Lender as attorney-in-fact pursuant to Section
14.03(c).
ARTICLE 10 - CONDEMNATION
Section 10.01 Representations and Warranties.
The representations and warranties made by Borrower to Lender in this Section 10.01 are made as of the Effective Date and are true and correct except as disclosed on the Exceptions to Representations and Warranties Schedule.
(a) Prior Condemnation Action.
No part of the Mortgaged Property has been taken in connection with a Condemnation Action.
(b) Pending Condemnation Actions.
No Condemnation Action is pending nor, to Borrower's knowledge, is threatened for the partial or total condemnation or taking of the Mortgaged Property.
Multifamily Loan and Security Agreement
(Non-Recourse)
Article 9
Form 6001.NR
08-13
© 2013 Fannie Mae
Item # 10.
EXHIBITB
CALIFORNIA HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY
INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
FOR CALIFORNIA HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY DEVELOPMENTS
Owner shall procure and maintain for the duration of the loan, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property, which may arise from or in connection with the owners operation of the premises to which this contract applies.
Minimum Scope of Insurance
Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
1, Property insurance against the perils of fire, "extended coverage", vandalism, and malicious mischief to real property and business income (rents).
2. If not granted a waiver, Property insurance against the perils of earthquake and flood for both real property and business income (rents) (may be purchased through CalHFA). }. Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence Form ce ooou
4, Insurance Services Office Form Number CA 0001 covering Automobile Liability. Code 1 (any auto).
5. Workers Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance.
6. Boiler and Machinery coverage against standard "broad form" perils.
Minimum Limits of Insurance
Owner shall maintain limits no less than:
L Property Insurance: Full replacement cost with no coinsurance penalty provision for real property, and at least the annual gross potential rental income for the development for business interruption coverage.
2. General Liability: (Including operations, products and completed operations.) $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit.
CalHFARA.TEX.NRSGlenbrook Apta.
1/9!2006.NDSljaf-#124034v2 -23-
Item # 6.
Item # 10.
3. Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage.
4. Employer's Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease.
5. Earthquake and Flood:
(a) Limit as provided through participation in the earthquake and flood DIC policy coverage offered through the Agency, or.
(b) For new proposed projects, application to Multifamily Programs underwriting for a waiver.
(c) For projects not covered by the Agency policy or granted a waiver, total replacement value (building replacement cost plus business interruption value) with no coinsurance penalty provision.
Blanket earthquake insurance policies will be considered on a case by case basis.
6. Boiler & Machinery: $1,000,000.
Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions
Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by CalHFA. At the option of the CaIHFA, either: the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or selfinsured retentions as respects CalHFA, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the owner shall provide a financial guarantee satisfactory to CalHFA guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the owner may select deductibles no greater than $10,000 per occurrence on Property and Boiler & Machinery coverages, and no greater than 5% of the values per building per location at the time and place of the loss per occurrence on Earthquake and Flood coverages.
Other Insurance Provisions
With respect to Property and Earthquake and Flood coverage, the Agency's interest shall be protected by a Lenders Loss Payable Endorsement naming the Agency as "Loss Payee." Crime Coverage: The Agency recommends, but does not require owner to carry insurance covering money or other property against burglary, robbery or theft.
Directors and Officers: The Agency recommends but does not require liability insurance for directors and officers of non-profit boards.
The general liability policy is to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
CaIHFARA.TEX.NRSGlenbrook Apls.
1I9/2006.NDS/jaf-#124034v2 -24-
Item # 6.
Item # 10.
1 The owner's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance. Any insurance or selfinsurance maintained by the Agency shall be excess of the owner's insurance and shall not contribute with it.
2. Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be canceled, reduced or modified except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the Agency.
3. The Agency, its officers, officials, and employees are to be covered as additional insureds with respect to liability arising out of ownership, maintenance or use of the premises.
Acceptability of Insurers
Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A: vn or an S&P rating of AA.
Verification of Coverage
Policies must be acquired at initial occupancy and a certificate of insurance must be submitted to the Agency for approval 45 days prior to permanent loan recordation. Renewal insurance certificates must be submitted 30 days prior to the expiration date of any current certificate.
Impounds
At the time of permanent loan closing, the Agency will establish insurance impounds.
CaIHFARA.TEX.NRSGlenbrook Apts.
1/9!2006.NDSljaf-#124034v2 -25-
Item # 6.
Item # 10.
EXHIBIT “P”
Item # 10.
From: Cristina Green
To: Denni Ragsdale; Marian Grant
Cc: Kristi Isham
Subject: RE: [External] - RE: Additional questions to the removal of the carport at Cedar Park Apt., (CalHFA Dev. No 02- 0270-N) & Glenbrook Apts., (CalHFA Dev. No. 02-049-N)
Date: Monday, May 8, 2023 10:52:49 AM
Good morning, Denni,
The borrower does not have to replace the carports that were removed.
Please keep in mind that section 12(d) of the Regulatory Agreement states that the borrower is not allowed to materially remodel, add to, reconstruct, demolish, or damage any part of the development. In the future, if there is a need to any of these actions, please contact the Agency for approval.
Thank you,
Cristina Green
Housing Finance Officer
Multifamily - Asset Management
California Housing Finance Agency
Cell:310.736.8504
Office Address: 500 Capitol Mall, Ste. 1400, MS 990, Sacramento, CA 95814 This message and any attached documents contain information from the California Housing Finance Agency that may be confidential and/or privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not read, copy, distribute, or use this information. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message. Thank you.
From: Denni Ragsdale <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, May 5, 2023 3:44 PM
To: Marian Grant <[email protected]>
Cc: Cristina Green <[email protected]>; Kristi Isham <[email protected]> Subject: [External] - RE: Additional questions to the removal of the carport at Cedar Park Apt., (CalHFA Dev. No 02-0270-N) & Glenbrook Apts., (CalHFA Dev. No. 02-049-N) CAUTION: This email was sent from a non-CalHFA email address. Please do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Hello Marian,
I hope this email finds you doing great, and enjoying your Friday! We wanted to follow up on this email and find out CalHFA’s stance on if we must replace the carports that were destroyed and removed from the properties? Could you please let us know when you have a moment?
Thank you so much!
Item # 10.
Denni Ragsdale
Cascade Housing Association
P.O. Box 182
Springfield, OR 97477
Office: 541.726.6181
Direct: 916.813.0783
[email protected]
From: Kristi Isham <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2023 1:11 PM
To: [email protected]
Cc: Denni Ragsdale <[email protected]>; [email protected] Subject: FW: Additional questions to the removal of the carport at Cedar Park Apt., (CalHFA Dev. No 02-0270-N) & Glenbrook Apts., (CalHFA Dev. No. 02-049-N) Marian,
Please see attached pictures and responses in red below. Apologize for the lag time in responding.
Thanks
Kristi
From: Marian Grant <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, April 03, 2023 11:57 AM
To: Denni Ragsdale <[email protected]>
Cc: Kristi Isham <[email protected]>; Cristina Green <[email protected]> Subject: Additional questions to the removal of the carport at Cedar Park Apt., (CalHFA Dev. No 02- 0270-N) & Glenbrook Apts., (CalHFA Dev. No. 02-049-N)
Hello Denni,
I have a few questions regarding the removal of the carport for Cedar Park and Glenbrook Apts., Were there bids for the removal of the carport? No, emergency processes to get carports down before more fell down and damaged more cars.
What is the reason for the removal of the carport? They were falling on cars parked under them and a major safety concern as people and kids were out playing in the snow and in day to day activities.
Where there any lien release to the removal of the carport? No pre-liens filed due to exigent circumstances. Contractor had knowledge of working for ownership from previous jobs.
Item # 10.
Please provide all support documents to the questions.
Thank you,
Please note my new address and phone number
Ms. Marian Grant
California Housing Finance Agency
500 Capitol Mall, Ste.,1400 MS 990
Sacramento, CA 95814
[email protected]
www.CalHFA.ca.gov
Direct Line: 916-201-8613
Sign up for our Enews Announcements to receive occasional Multifamily program updates and more.
This message and any attached documents contain information from the California Housing Finance Agency that may be confidential and/or privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not read, copy, distribute, or use this information. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message. Thank you.
PPlease consider the environment before printing this email.
From: Denni Ragsdale <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2023 12:58 PM
To: Marian Grant <[email protected]>
Cc: Kristi Isham <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] - Cedar Park Apartments (CalHFA Dev. No 02-0270-N) & Glenbrook Apartments (CalHFA Dev. No. 02-049-N)
CAUTION: This email was sent from a non-CalHFA email address. Please do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Hello Marian,
I hope you are doing well and surviving all the storms that you all have been experiencing! We are reaching out with a question regarding two of our projects located in Grass Valley, Cedar Park Apartments (CalHFA No. 02-0270-N) and Glenbrook Apartments (CalHFA No. 02-049-N).
Both projects experienced carport failures at the end of February, beginning of March, due to the
Item # 10.
weight of the snow that had accumulated with the storms at that time. For safety reasons, we have successfully removed all carports from both projects, however would like to confirm with CalHFA that we are not required to replace them? We are not seeing any language in our agreements stating this, however, want to make sure we are covering our bases.
When you have a moment to respond we would greatly appreciate that.
Take Care,
Denni Ragsdale
Cascade Housing Association
P.O. Box 182
Springfield, OR 97477
Office 541-726-6181
Direct 916-813-0783
Item # 10.
EXHIBIT “Q”
Item # 10.
1750 Prarie City Road
Suite 130-1180
Folsom, CA 95630
(916) 747-9967
CA Lic# 1041002
Brief description of work: Construct carports at Oakridge, Glenbrook, and Cedar Park apartments as previously configured. Includes carport lighting and parking lot work.
General Requirements
Permits and testing BY OWNER
Plans for submittal to City of GV BY OWNER
General Conditions 6 Months
Superintendent 1 EA
Resident protection measures
Existing Conditions
Demo old carport footings
Demo old lighting conduits
Masonary
Pour new footings per engineering from carport manufacturer Patch asphalt as needed
Patch sidewalks as needed
Restripe asphalt in areas of work
Metals
Provide carports and associated engineering
- Construct 20 units at Cedar Park
- Construct 12 units at Glenbrook
- Construct 16 units at Oak Ridge
Electrical
Install lighting to new carports
Electrical design/engineering
3rd party utility locates
New conduit, wiring and relabeling of panels
OVERHEAD 10%
PROFIT 10%
CONTINGENCY 5%
INSURANCE/WARRANTY/ADMIN 2%
Glenbrook $261,900
Oak Ridge $347,650
Cedar Park $405,760
EXCLUSIONS
Concealed items, landscaping repair, panel upgrades, special inspections bonds, moving of existing utilities, liquidated damages Respectfully submitted, Austin Reilly, Principal Proposal #24.178
PROPOSAL
Item # 10.
EXHIBIT “R”
Item # 10.
120 24 6
Days Weeks Months
GENERAL CONDITIONS
Cost Codes Quantity Unit Unit Price Total Comments
1.310 320 Hrs 95.00 30,569.60 1/3 Time
1001 12 wks 2,300.00 27,600.00 1/2 Time
1005 26 wks 3,200.00 83,200.00 + 2 Wks To Final Acc
1009 48 Hrs 125.00 6,000.00
1011 50 Hrs 75.00 3,750.00
1015 24 wks 150.00 3,600.00
1020 24 wks 60.00 1,440.00
1030 24 wks 30.00 720.00
1032 24 wks 30.00 720.00
1033 6 Mo 150.00 900.00
1035 24 wks 15.00 360.00
1040 24 wks 25.00 600.00
1050 3,000 LF 2.50 7,500.00 Allowance
1055 2 LS 100.00 200.00
1090 1 EA 600.00 600.00
1112 24 wks 250.00 6,000.00 1 day per week
1115 4 Lds 1,250.00 5,000.00 40 yd Minimum Size
1127 24 wks 25.00 600.00
1200 6 Mo 350.00 2,100.00
1210 0 Mo 500.00 0.00 By Owner
1230 6 Mo 1,000.00 6,000.00
1235 6 Mo 600.00 3,600.00
1260 6 Mo 750.00 4,500.00
1265 6 Mo 150.00 900.00
1300 6 Mo 1,500.00 9,000.00
1350 24 wks 150.00 3,600.00
1500 24 wks 50.00 1,200.00
1530 24 wks 500.00 12,000.00
1602 1 LS 1,000.00 1,000.00
1850 0 LS 0.00 0.00 By Owner
1900 1 LS 300.00 300.00
1910 0 LS 0.00 0.00 Not Applicable
1950 0 LS 0.00 0.00 Not Applicable
1980 1 LS 800.00 800.00
1985 0 LS 0.00 0.00 By Owner
$37,393 224,359.60
909,600
1,133,960
0.20% 2,268
0.72% 8,181
9.00% 102,997
BOND FORMULAS 1,247,405
Projects under 500K 17,001 62,370
Projects 500k-2.5mil 13,482 1,309,775.36
Projects 2.5mil-5mil 14,747 0
Projects 5mil-7.5mil 15,795 0.70% 0
Projects 7.5mil & over 13,744 0
1,309,775.36
0 NA
Item #
1 2
3 227,400
303,200
379,000
GLEENBROOK, OAK RIDGE & CEDAR PARK CARPORTS 8/28/24
Description
Office Supplies
Project Manager
Safety Manager
Project Duration
Project Admin (FOM)/ Project Engineer
Price per SQ. FT.
Breakdown Bid Total >>>>
GLENBROOK - 12 UNITS
JCI SOV
Division Description
Sub/Allowance
OAK RIDGE - 16 UNITS
CEDAR PARK - 20 UNITS
Dumpster
Photos
Safety & First Aid
Fire Extinguishers
Postage
Supervision/Superintendent
General Superintendent
Clean Up, Daily (Temp.)
Procore Management Software
Drinking Water
Internet
Office Equipment
Site Security Fencing
Temp. Electric
Project Sign
JCI - Office Trailer
Tool Storage
Temp. Toilets (1/10 Men)
Temp. Telephone
Blueprints
Pickup Allowance
Misc. Equipment
CAL/OSHA Handwash
Small Tools
Gas / Oil
Archive Scanning
Permits & fees
GC's per month>>>> TOTAL GC's>>>>
CARPORT BREAKDOWN TOTAL >>>>
Builder's Risk Insurance
Business License
Liquidated Damages
Warranty Expense
OH & P
TOTAL BID
Payment & Performance Bond
Recommended 5% CONTENGENCY
TOTAL BID W/O BOND>>
P&P Bond & Bond Ins.
Bond Insurance
COMBINED SUBTOTAL>>>>
Warranty
Liability Insurance
Grand Total
Building SQ. FT.
Bid
909,600
Item # 10.
Contractor:
Project:
Bid Date:
Exclusions
1 2
3 4 Excludes builders risk insurance.
5 Excludes liquidated damages.
6 Excludes contaminated or hazardous soil.
7 Excludes dewatering.
8 Excludes structural design & fees.
9 Excludes electrical design & fees.
10 Excludes any required landscaping repairs (by owner's vendor). 11 Excludes special testing & inspections (by owner to prevent conflict of interest). 12 Excludes concealed/unforeseen conditions/materials.
13 Excludes handling or removal of hazardous materials and any remediation required. 14 Excludes special working hours & overtime - Standard hours M-F for non-holidays. 15 Excludes temp power - power by owner.
16 Excludes relocating existing UG utilities if required for new footing locations. 17 18
19 20
Inclusions
1 Fabricate and install new steel parking structures.
2 3
4 Includes new LED lighting and wiring.
5 New concrete sections for flatwork where temp demo required for UG structural and electrical. 6 New parking lot striping where required from demo work. 7 8
9 10
New UG electrical trenches required for lighting.
Removal and replacement of asphalt required for parking structure columns & bases.
QUALIFICATIONS
Excludes permits & fees.
Excludes delays due to permits, material/equipment procurement, weather & other acts of God.
Excludes bonds.
QUALIFICATIONS
Jackson Construction, Inc.
GLEENBROOK, OAK RIDGE & CEDAR PARK CARPORTS
8/28/24
Item # 10.
EXHIBIT “S”
Item # 10.
July 14, 2023
Mr. Jeff Camacho
Farmers Insurance
[email protected]
RE: Glenbrook Apartments – 265 Sutton Way, Grass Valley, CA 95945 Carport Condition Assessment
Insured: Oregon Investors VII
Claim No. 7006217336
Dear Mr. Camacho:
Our office was asked to comment on the carport structures located 265 Sutton Way, Grass Valley after experiencing significant snow loading during the 2022/2023 winter season. Reported damage to the light-gage metal carport framing included, but was not limited to the following: creases in C-beams, loosened fastener connections, leaning carports, twisted/bent framing members, etc. Several photographs of the carport damage were provided and are depicted in Photographs 1 and 2.
Photo 1 – Leaning Carport Canopy Photo 2 – Bowed & Creased C Beam Based on provided information, our office believes significant snow loading damaged the carport structures inducing deformed and buckled structural light-gage framing members. Once light-gage members experience deformation (i.e., flange and web crippling) their structural integrity is greatly compromised, and they should be replaced. In our opinion, snow loading damaged the carport structures located at 265 Sutton Way, which now require replacement.
Sincerely,
Degenkolb Engineers
By:
Peter Sandlin, S.E.
Principal
07-14-2023
Item # 10.
EXHIBIT “T”
Item # 10.
32Z5SDMF3
Toll Free: (800) 435-7764
Email: [email protected]
Please include your claim # on any correspondence
National Document Center
P.O. Box 268994
Oklahoma City, OK 73126-8994
August 30, 2024 www.farmers.com/claimstatus
OREGON INVESTORS V LP
DBA OAKRIDGE APARTMENTS
PO BOX 2968
PORTLAND OR 97208-2968
RE: Insured: Oregon Investors V LP
Claim Number: 5021822222-1-1
Policy Number: 0606745027
Loss Date: 03/07/2023
Location of Loss: 228 Sutton Way, Grass Valley, CA
Subject: Important Claim Information
Dear Oregon Investors V LP:
Thank you for choosing us to provide for your insurance needs. We value you as a customer and appreciate the opportunity to be of service. This letter shall serve as a follow up to our telephone conversation on August 29, 2024.
Joshua Meltz from our office inspected the property on March 17, 2023. During his field inspection, Mr. Meltz met with Jeremy Burt from Element 26 Construction. Mr. Meltz advised me that he observed the following damage to the carports:
*Metal C-Beams had creases in them
*The metal ties that connect metal beams together had come undone *The metal beams had bent from the weighty of the snow
*Roofs had shifted back and fascia separating
*Dents in steel beams from stress of shift
*Roofs shifted back
*Leaning carports
*Compressed beams and front plates bowing out (photo indicates represents all carports) *Fascia off
*Ties have shifted
*Un-straight tops
Based on the above items it was concluded that the carports were damaged beyond repair. We issued an actual cash value payment to you on June 13, 2023.
We encourage you to visit www.farmers.com to learn more about our self-service options available to you, including the ability to view your claim status, upload documents and photos and find local service providers.
Item # 10.
32Z5SDMF3
If you have any questions, please call me at (858) 444-5211.
Thank you.
Jeff Camacho
Special Commercial Property General Adjuster
(858) 444-5211
Farmers Insurance Exchange
Email communications are preferred and should be sent to [email protected]. If hard copies of communications are required, they should be sent to our National Document Center at P.O. Box 268994, Oklahoma City, OK 73126-8994.
CC: ELISE RINGER, SARAH T WINDER
Item # 10.
EXHIBIT “U”
Item # 10.
LRX5SDM53
Toll Free: (800) 435-7764
Email: [email protected]
Please include your claim # on any correspondence
National Document Center
P.O. Box 268994
Oklahoma City, OK 73126-8994
August 30, 2024 www.farmers.com/claimstatus
OREGON INVESTORS VIII LP
DBA CEDAR PARK APARTMENTS
PO BOX 2968
PORTLAND OR 97208-2968
RE: Insured: Oregon Investors VIII LP
Claim Number: 5021781016-1-1
Policy Number: 0606745005
Loss Date: 02/28/2023
Location of Loss: 210 Sutton Way, Grass Valley, CA
Subject: Important Claim Information
Dear Oregon Investors VIII LP:
Thank you for choosing us to provide for your insurance needs. We value you as a customer and appreciate the opportunity to be of service. This letter shall serve as a follow up to our telephone conversation on August 29, 2024.
Joshua Meltz from our office inspected the property on March 17, 2023. During his field inspection, Mr. Meltz met with Jeremy Burt from Element 26 Construction. Mr. Meltz advised me that he observed the following damage to the carports:
*Metal C-Beams had creases in them
*The metal ties that connect metal beams together had come undone *The metal beams had bent from the weighty of the snow
*Roofs had shifted back and fascia separating
*Dents in steel beams from stress of shift
*Roofs shifted back
*Leaning carports
*Compressed beams and front plates bowing out (photo indicates represents all carports) *Fascia off
*Ties have shifted
*Un-straight tops
Based on the above items it was concluded that the carports were damaged beyond repair. We issued an actual cash value payment to you on June 13, 2023.
We encourage you to visit www.farmers.com to learn more about our self-service options available to you, including the ability to view your claim status, upload documents and photos and find local service providers.
Item # 10.
LRX5SDM53
If you have any questions, please call me at (858) 444-5211.
Thank you.
Jeff Camacho
Special Commercial Property General Adjuster
(858) 444-5211
Truck Insurance Exchange
Email communications are preferred and should be sent to [email protected]. If hard copies of communications are required, they should be sent to our National Document Center at P.O. Box 268994, Oklahoma City, OK 73126-8994.
CC: ELISE RINGER, SARAH T WINDER
Item # 10.
EXHIBIT “V”
Item # 10.
CALHFA ASSET MANAGEMENT
SITE INSPECTION REPORT
1 PROJECT NAME Glenbrook Apartments MGT COMPANY Cambridge Real Estate Services
DATE OF
VISIT
12/14/2021
PROJECT ADDRESS 265 Sutton Way
Grass Valley, CA 95945
YEAR BUILT 2006 TOTAL
BUILDINGS
8 CALHFA# 02049N PROPERTY
MANAGER
Janeen Kallus TOTAL UNITS 52
CALHFA INSPECTOR Steve Markan PROPERTY MGR
PHONE NUMBER
503-450-0238 # UNITS
INSPECTED
5 CALHFA INSPECTOR
EMAIL
[email protected] PROPERTY MGR
EMAIL
[email protected] PROJECT
TYPE
Family
TYPE OF VISIT Annual ON-SITE
MANAGER
Ricci Cooper # VACANCIES 0
INSPECTION TYPE
(PROCESS TYPE)
80/20 MAINTENANCE Gary Meales BED BUGS Yes ☐ No ☒
HUD 9834 COMPLETE
(If Applicable)
Yes ☐ No ☐ OTHERS
PRESENT
JOINT
INSPECTION
Select
ITEMS RATED 3 REQUIRES A RESPONSE WITHIN FIFTEEN (15) BUSINESS DAYS UPON RECEIPT OF THIS REPORT Provide CalHFA with a plan of action and time frame for implementation and completion # OF ITEMS RATED 3: 3
SEVERITY RATING LEVELS
1 = LEVEL 1(Minor Deficiency) 2 = LEVEL 2(Potential Problem) 3 = LEVEL 3 - ACTION REQUIRED (WITHIN 15 DAYS) 4 = NOD = NO OBSERVED DEFICIENCY 5 = N/A = NOT APPLICABLE
EXTERIOR INTERIOR INTERIOR
Site Building Systems Units
1. Fences & Gates 5 20. Domestic Water/Plumbing 4 45. Bathroom 2
2. Grounds 4 21. Electrical System 4 46. Call-for-Aid Select
3. Mailboxes & Signs 4 22. Elevator Equip. 5 47. Ceiling Select
4. Market Appeal 4 23. Emergency Power 3 48. Doors 3
5. Parking Lots/Driveways 4 24. Fire Protection 4 49. Electrical System Select
6. Play Areas & Equipment 4 25. HVAC 4 50. Floors Select
7. Refuse Disposal 4 26. Roof Exhaust System 5 51. Hot Water Heater 3
8. Retaining Walls 5 27. Sanitary System 4 52. HVAC System Select
9. Storm Drainage 4 28. Health & Safety 4 53. Kitchen Select
10. Walkways & Steps 4 Common Area 54. Laundry Area Select
11. Health & Safety 4 29. Basement/Garage/Carport 5 55. Lighting Select Building Exterior 30. Closet/Utility/Mechanical 4 56. Outlets/Switches Select
12. Doors 4 31. Community Room 4 57. Patio/Porch/Balcony Select
13. Fire Escapes 5 32. Day Care 5 58. Smoke/CO Detector Select
14. Foundations 4 33. Halls/Corridors/Stairs 4 59. Stairs Select
15. Lighting 4 34. Kitchen 4 60. Walls 1
16. Roofs 4 35. Laundry Room 4 61. Windows Select
17. Walls 4 36. Lobby 4 62. Housekeeping Select
18. Windows 4 37. Office 4 63. Health & Safety Select
19. Health & Safety 4 38. Other Community Space 4 Certifications:
39. Patio/Porch/Balcony 4 1. Boilers N/A
40. Pools & Related Structure 5 2. Elevators N/A
41. Restrooms/Pool Structure 4 3. Fire Alarms N/A
42. Storage 4 4. LB Paint Disclosure Forms N/A
43. Trash Collection Areas 5 5. LB Paint Inspection Report N/A
44. Health & Safety 4 6. Fire Sprinkler Systems Yes
Item # 10.
CALHFA ASSET MANAGEMENT
SITE INSPECTION REPORT
2 UNITS INSPECTED 414, 511, 612, 811, 812
HEALTH, FIRE, & SAFETY ITEMS RATED #3 – ACTION REQUIRED WITHIN 72 HOURS EXTERIOR & INTERIOR ITEMS RATED #3 – ACTION REQUIRED WITHIN 15 BUSINESS DAYS
23. Emergency Power
Level 3 – Auxiliary light in the office/community building is not working.
Unit 414
48. Doors
Level 3 – Bedroom 1 door has a hole.
Unit 511
48. Doors
Level 3 – Hall bathroom door does not latch.
51. Hot Water Heater
Level 3 – Water Heater PRV discharge pipe is missing.
EXTERIOR & INTERIOR RATED #1 & 2 – ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR REPAIR Unit 414
48. Doors
Level 2 – Laundry room door is damaged.
60. Walls
Level 1 – Wall damage in the hall bathroom above the shower.
Unit 811
48. Doors
Level 1 – Laundry room door is missing.
Level 1 – Screen door is damaged.
Unit 812
45. Bathroom
Level 2 – Hall bathroom tank cover is broken.
OVERALL COMMENTS
Item # 10.
EXHIBIT “W”
Item # 10.
CALHFA ASSET MANAGEMENT
SITE INSPECTION REPORT
1 PROJECT NAME Cedar Park MGT COMPANY Cambridge Real Estate Services
DATE OF
VISIT
12/14/2021
PROJECT ADDRESS 210 Sutton Way
Grass Valley, CA 95945
YEAR BUILT 2004 TOTAL
BUILDINGS
17 CALHFA# 02027N PROPERTY
MANAGER
Janeen Kallus TOTAL UNITS 81
CALHFA INSPECTOR Steve Markan PROPERTY MGR
PHONE NUMBER
503-450-0238 # UNITS
INSPECTED
8 CALHFA INSPECTOR
EMAIL
[email protected] PROPERTY MGR
EMAIL
[email protected] PROJECT
TYPE
Family
TYPE OF VISIT Annual ON-SITE
MANAGER
Sonia Perez # VACANCIES 2
INSPECTION TYPE
(PROCESS TYPE)
80/20 MAINTENANCE Julio Garcia BED BUGS Yes ☐ No ☒
HUD 9834 COMPLETE
(If Applicable)
Yes ☐ No ☐ OTHERS
PRESENT
JOINT
INSPECTION
Select
ITEMS RATED 3 REQUIRES A RESPONSE WITHIN FIFTEEN (15) BUSINESS DAYS UPON RECEIPT OF THIS REPORT Provide CalHFA with a plan of action and time frame for implementation and completion # OF ITEMS RATED 3: 4
SEVERITY RATING LEVELS
1 = LEVEL 1(Minor Deficiency) 2 = LEVEL 2(Potential Problem) 3 = LEVEL 3 - ACTION REQUIRED (WITHIN 15 DAYS) 4 = NOD = NO OBSERVED DEFICIENCY 5 = N/A = NOT APPLICABLE
EXTERIOR INTERIOR INTERIOR
Site Building Systems Units
1. Fences & Gates 5 20. Domestic Water/Plumbing 4 45. Bathroom 4
2. Grounds 4 21. Electrical System 4 46. Call-for-Aid 5
3. Mailboxes & Signs 4 22. Elevator Equip. 5 47. Ceiling 4
4. Market Appeal 4 23. Emergency Power 3 48. Doors 3
5. Parking Lots/Driveways 4 24. Fire Protection 4 49. Electrical System 4
6. Play Areas & Equipment 4 25. HVAC 4 50. Floors 4
7. Refuse Disposal 4 26. Roof Exhaust System 4 51. Hot Water Heater 3
8. Retaining Walls 5 27. Sanitary System 4 52. HVAC System 4
9. Storm Drainage 4 28. Health & Safety 4 53. Kitchen 4
10. Walkways & Steps 4 Common Area 54. Laundry Area 4
11. Health & Safety 4 29. Basement/Garage/Carport 5 55. Lighting 4 Building Exterior 30. Closet/Utility/Mechanical 4 56. Outlets/Switches 4
12. Doors 3 31. Community Room 4 57. Patio/Porch/Balcony 4
13. Fire Escapes 4 32. Day Care 5 58. Smoke/CO Detector 4
14. Foundations 4 33. Halls/Corridors/Stairs 4 59. Stairs 5
15. Lighting 4 34. Kitchen 4 60. Walls 4
16. Roofs 1 35. Laundry Room 4 61. Windows 4
17. Walls 4 36. Lobby 4 62. Housekeeping 4
18. Windows 4 37. Office 4 63. Health & Safety 4
19. Health & Safety 4 38. Other Community Space 4 Certifications:
39. Patio/Porch/Balcony 4 1. Boilers N/A
40. Pools & Related Structure 5 2. Elevators N/A
41. Restrooms/Pool Structure 4 3. Fire Alarms N/A
42. Storage 4 4. LB Paint Disclosure Forms N/A
43. Trash Collection Areas 4 5. LB Paint Inspection Report N/A
44. Health & Safety 4 6. Fire Sprinkler Systems Yes
Item # 10.
CALHFA ASSET MANAGEMENT
SITE INSPECTION REPORT
2 UNITS INSPECTED 101, 103, 104, 121, 131, 133, 136, 140 HEALTH, FIRE, & SAFETY ITEMS RATED #3 – ACTION REQUIRED WITHIN 72 HOURS EXTERIOR & INTERIOR ITEMS RATED #3 – ACTION REQUIRED WITHIN 15 BUSINESS DAYS
12. Doors
Level 3 – Office/Community exterior door needs to be painted.
23. Emergency Power
Level 3 – Auxiliary light in the office/community building is not working.
Unit 101
48. Doors
Level 3 – Hall bathroom door is broken.
Unit 103
51. Hot Water Heater
Level 3 – Hot water heater PRV discharge pipe is missing.
Unit 133
51. Hot Water Heater
Level 3 – Hot water heater PRV discharge pipe is missing.
Unit 131
48. Doors
Level 3 – Entry door handle is damaged.
EXTERIOR & INTERIOR RATED #1 & 2 – ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR REPAIR
16. Roofs
Level 1 – Splash block is missing at building 220-223 north side.
OVERALL COMMENTS
Item # 10.
EXHIBIT “X”
Item # 10.
REDACTED
REDACTED
Item # 10.
Item # 10.
Attachment 2
Public Comments Received Prior to September 5, 2024
Item # 10.
Lucy Rollins
Subject: RE: Voicemail from on Aug 20 2024 3:32 PM
From: Anonymous - Voicemail box 8880 <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2024 3:36 PM
To: Public Comments <[email protected]>
Subject: Voicemail from on Aug 20 2024 3:32 PM
You received a new voicemail message
ILJNew voicemail message
Time: Tuesday, August 20 2024 3:32 PM
From:
Duration: 2 minutes 27 seconds
Voicemail box:
Transcript:
8880
Yes, my name is Lynn St. Jacques. I'm a longtime resident of Cedar Park Apartments on Sutton Way in Grass Valley. And Cambridge Management Company can well afford to replace the awnings, the carports, which were a health and safety issue. Our lighting was also embedded in the carports. we've been without lighting since the snowstorm as well. The parking lot is unlit, and it's unsafe. Since COVID, the management company has embarked on a program where they raise rents several times within a year. Most residents thought that the rental increases would be limited to a certain percentage a year or a certain number of rental increases. But Cambridge doesn't seem to agree with that, and people have had their rent increased, you know, every couple of months to the point where a lot of people have moved because their budgets just, you know, you move in thinking your rent's going to be one amount, and in months later it goes up a couple hundred dollars a month, that doesn't work for families. So, you know, my position is watching the company deteriorate, you know, after COVID. It seems like they discovered that, you know, they 1
Item # 10.
could get away with providing less and they can't keep tenants and they can't, well, the tenants mostly they can keep because there's such a housing shortage, but the turnover in maintenance staff is just incredible. So their business practices are such that it's, you know, it's not a benefit to employees or tenants, either one, and I believe that they can easily afford to replace those carports, which are essential for health and safety. So, I hope you can do something about that. Thank you. Goodbye. END Rate this transcript's accuracy
I I
Mailbox Capacity: 97 /99 available
© 2024 GoTo Group, Inc.
333 Summer St, Boston, MA 02210, United States
Follow us on Twitter, Linkedln, Facebook
2 Page 253
Item # 10.
Lucy Rollins
Subject: RE: Voicemail from on Aug 2120243:59 PM
From: WIRELESS CALLER - Voicemail box 8880 <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2024 4:03 PM
To: Public Comments <[email protected]>
Subject: Voicemail from on Aug 21 2024 3:59 PM
You received a new voicemail message
l©New voicemail message
Time: Wednesday, August 21 2024 3:59 PM
From:
Duration: 1 minute 34 seconds
Voicemail box:
Transcript:
8880
Yes hello this is Jesse Williams I live at Oak Ridge Apartments 228 Sutton Way Grass Valley California my phone number is I
just read the article and I have a lot of feedback on the situation is in leased carports and they are still advertising that there's carports. They told me that they were going to be rebuilt and they have not and since then they keep raising our rents and lowering some people's rents even though we had a financial hardship with two people losing their jobs and they raised our rent and someone else that I know had financial hardship and they lowered theirs so the property manager doesn't give a -lririrlc about any of us and our concerns and I have much more tell you. So please call me back at your earliest convenience. Once again that's Jesse Williams . I look forward to speaking with you. Thank you very much and have a blessed day.
1
Item # 10.
Rate this transcript's accuracy
Mailbox Capacity: 97 /99 available
© 2024 GoTo Group, Inc.
333 Summer St, Boston, MA 02210, United States
Follow us on Twitter, Linkedln, Facebook
2 Page 255
Item # 10.
21 August 2024
Grass Valley City Council
125 E Main Street
Grass Valley, CA 95945
Esteemed Council Members:
I write to you as a 12 year resident of Cedar Park Apartments in Grass Valley, CA, on the health & safety issue of carport replacement. We have handicapped residents who need shelter provided by carports as they transition, from car to wheelchair in rain & snow. You may recall that we were under an extreme heat advisory just last month. My neighbor has an infrared heat scanner & measured the temperature to be 152 degrees inside his car. This is the result of sun magnified through a windshield.
The carports protected us from temperature extremes both hot & cold. The simple consideration of people needing shelter while retrieving grocery bags & kids out of their cars is no small thing. Then there's the lighting. The lighting for the parking lot was embedded in the carports & tenants have been without a lighted parking lot for almost 2 years now. It's unsafe, I've written work reports for the issue (available on request.) Both the carports & lighting are urgent safety issues needing to be resolved before the darkness & rain of winter this year.
As for the claim that it's too costly to replace them: before covid each of the three adjacent apartment complex managed by Cambridge had it's own maintenance person. Now maintenance workers, (such as they are, because the turnover rate is so high) are moved from complex to complex, to where the highest need prevails. This is what maintenance staff relates as well as the fact that this company is rated as a one-star employer. It seems that during the covid pandemic businesses learned that, when it comes to essentials, like food & housing, providing less while increasing prices was hughly profitable. And that's what's happening here.
One political party is running on a proposal to cap rent increases annually & tie them to the Tax Credit programs that apartment complexes, including Cedar Park, in this area are participants of.
Cambridge Real Estate Services can well afford to replace the essential safety features of carports & lighting after the unprecedented rental increases that have occurred in the past 2 years. Tax Credit programs come with obligations, ones Cambridge Real Estate Services should not be exempted from.
Lin St Jacques
Resident of Cedar Park
Item # 10.
373005.1
City of Grass Valley
City Council
Agenda Action Sheet
Title: Supplement to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Approved Dorsey Marketplace Project
CEQA: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.) (“CEQA”) and the State CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., tit.14, § 15000 et seq.), the City Council, at its April 28, 2020, regular meeting, certified a Final Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) for the mixed-use development known as the Dorsey Marketplace Project (“Project”).
That City Council action, along with the City Council’s approval of the Project, was subsequently challenged in court, with the ultimate result being that the City needed to make only minor changes to the original 2020 EIR. The required changes are set forth in documents from both the Court of Appeal and the Nevada County Superior Court, namely, a Modified Opinion from the Court of Appeal and a Revised Judgment and Peremptory Writ of Mandate from the superior court. These documents ordered the City to prepare further analysis of the extent to which Project-related traffic added to anticipated 2035 traffic on State Route (“SR”) 20/49 could result in adverse health effects on future Project residents and occupants.
In response to these judicial directives, the City prepared a Supplement to the Final EIR (“SFEIR”). The Draft SFEIR was circulated for public comment, and a Final SFEIR is now ready for City Council consideration and certification.
Recommendation:
1) Conduct the public hearing regarding the Supplement to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Dorsey Marketplace Project
2) Adopt Resolution No. 2024-66 certifying the updated Final Environmental Impact Report for the Dorsey Marketplace Project, thereby (i) determining that the deficiency in the Final EIR identified in the Modified Court of Appeal Opinion and Revised Judgment has been remedied, (ii) further determining that a new 2024 Final EIR, consisting of (a) the 2020 Final EIR, (b) the Draft FSEIR, and (c) responses to comments on the Draft FSEIR and related corrections, is legally adequate under CEQA, and (iii) permitting the implementation of any and all previously suspended Project activities and Project Approvals, subject to authorization by the superior court
Prepared by: Amy Wolfson, City Planner
Council Meeting Date: September 10, 2024 Date Prepared: August 27, 2024 Agenda: Public Hearing
Background Information: At its April 28, 2020 regular meeting, the City Council approved the Project applicant’s preferred iteration of the Project “Alternative B” and also certified the
Item # 11.
373005.1
Final EIR prepared for the Project and adopted Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations. The approved Project consisted of applications for a General Plan Amendment, Zoning Map Amendment, Development Review Permit, and Use Permit for a proposed mixed-use development on a 26.8-acre infill site. Approved Alternative B includes 104,350 square feet of commercial space, 8,500 square feet of office space, and 172 apartment units, along with pedestrian corridors, public plaza spaces, spaces for public art and murals throughout the commercial component, as well as a small dog park.
The City Council’s certification of the 2020 Final EIR for the Project was challenged by Community Environmental Advocates, Community Environmental Advocates Foundation, Protect Grass Valley, and Ralph A. Silberstein (collectively, “Petitioners”), who filed a Petition for Writ of Mandate (“Petition”) in the Nevada County Superior Court. The Petitioners appealed the Superior Court’s denial of their Petition, and the Third District Court of Appeal upheld the Superior Court’s rejection of the Petitioners’ challenges to the Final EIR, with one exception. The Court of Appeal found that traffic from the Project could exacerbate health risks for future Project residents and occupants by contributing to mobile source emissions associated with SR 20/49 in 2035, and that the Final EIR did not adequately evaluate this potential impact. In October 2023, the Superior Court issued a Revised Judgment directing the City to suspend all Project activities that have the potential to adversely affect the physical environment until this deficiency in the Final EIR is properly addressed. The Superior Court did not require the City Council to vacate any of its prior actions associated with Project approval in 2020. Thus, the approved General Plan Amendment, Zoning Map Amendment, Development Review Permit, and Use Permit all remain in effect. The Superior Court did, however, suspend any and all Project activities that could result in an adverse change or alteration to the physical environment until the City has taken the necessary actions to comply with CEQA.
Supplement to the EIR
In August 2023, the City approved a revised scope to its contract with environmental consulting firm, Dudek, authorizing that firm to prepare the SFEIR in compliance with the focused scope mandated by the courts. On February 3, 2024, the City published a Notice of Availability (NOA) for the Draft SFEIR for a 45-day public review period. The Draft SFEIR was published on the City’s website, and on the State Clearinghouse website, CEQAnet, and was available in hard copy at City Hall and at the Grass Valley - Royce Branch Library.
Consistent with the direction in the Revised Judgment and the Third District Court of Appeal’s Modified Opinion, the SFEIR includes a narrow scope that evaluates the health risk impacts of Project-related mobile source emissions from SR 20/49 in 2035 on new residents and occupants of the Project. In addition, health risks associated with existing sensitive receptors within 1,000 feet of SR 20/49 were assessed. Four roadway Health Risk Assessment (HRA) scenarios were analyzed in the SFEIR: baseline, baseline + Project, cumulative 2035, and cumulative 2035 + Project. Using these scenarios, Dudek was able to estimate the change between the current baseline impact and cumulative scenarios with and without Projectgenerated vehicle travel.
It is important to note that the 2020 Final EIR, based on data available in 2019 from the California Department of Transportation (“Caltrans”), assumed a baseline of daily traffic of 41,000 trips on SR 20/49, with the cumulative 2035 scenario resulting in an expected 57,000 trips, which exceeded the California Air Resource Board’s (“CARB’s”) Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective (“handbook”) threshold for “High Traffic
Item # 11.
373005.1
Roadways.” However, the most current data from Caltrans, as used in the 2024 FSEIR, shows a marked decrease of average daily trips on SR 20/49 since 2019, with 31,000 trips shown as the current baseline and 40,000 trips on SR 20/49 in the cumulative 2035 + Project scenario in 2035. Even though the current and projected 2035 trip counts fall below the CARB handbook’s definition of a High Traffic Roadway, the City conservatively analyzed the associated health risk associated with the Project per the court’s ruling.
The SFEIR concludes that mobile source emissions from Project generated traffic would not significantly exacerbate an existing or future environmental hazard. While Project-generated traffic would increase emissions and associated health effects from mobile source emissions under current and 2035 conditions, the additional cancer risk associated with the Project, using a conservative assumption that 100% of those daily tips are coming from SR 20/49, does not result in a significant exacerbation of the baseline cancer risk from mobile source emissions on SR 20/49 under current or 2035 conditions. Given that the Project’s trip distribution is expected be closer to 20% travel along SR 20/49, the baseline cancer risk associated with the Project is not expected to be significantly exacerbated. In other words, no significant health-related impacts would occur.
The SFEIR concludes no new mitigation is required to reduce the air quality impacts of the Project to a less-than-significant level with respect to exposing sensitive receptors and occupants to substantial pollutant concentrations. The proposed site design, along with mitigation measures already required under the 2020 Final EIR, adequately address air quality impacts of the Project, including the less-than-significant health effects identified in the SFEIR. The design of the Project, including spacing of the buildings to allow adequate airflow, along with the 50-foot buffer between the Dorsey Drive off-ramp with landscaping in compliance with Mitigation Measure 5a, and the 6-foot soundwall required under mitigation measure 9a, will reduce the potential health effects of Project-generated mobile source emissions. The SFEIR concludes there are no new significant impacts or impacts more severe than those that were identified in the Final EIR and that increased cancer and chronic health risks associated with Project-generated traffic would remain below applicable thresholds. Thus, the Project’s air quality impacts would remain less than significant.
Responses to Comments received during the 45-day public notice period for review of the Draft SFEIR were published on August 22, 2024. While the City received a total of 12 comment letters, most of them did not address the analysis in the SFEIR but instead commented on other aspects of the Project that were no longer under active consideration, given the narrow scope of the SFEIR and the fact that the courts did not require the City Council to vacate its 2020 Project approvals. For example, many comments addressed the Final EIR’s analysis of environmental issues that were either challenged and decided in the City’s favor in the Revised Judgment, or that could have been challenged in the prior litigation but were not. In either case, the Final EIR’s analysis is conclusively presumed valid, with the exception of the narrow, new analysis of Project-generated mobile source emissions and associated human health impacts on future project residents and occupants, as analyzed in the SFEIR. Nevertheless, Dudek provided responses to all comments, even those outside the scope of the SFEIR, describing the disposition of any significant environmental issues raised with good faith, reasoned analysis. The responses to the comments did not require any revisions to the analysis and conclusions in the SFEIR, though some data corrections were made as a result of comments from Northern Sierra Air Quality Management District.
The new (2024) Final EIR now before the City Council consists of (i) the 2020 Final EIR, (ii) the Draft FSEIR, and (iii) responses to comments on the Draft FSEIR and related corrections.
Item # 11.
373005.1
The adequacy of the original 2020 Final EIR is not in contention, however. The City Council should therefore focus its consideration on the adequacy of the Draft FSEIR and responses to comments on the Draft FSEIR and related corrections. The Council need not reconsider the merits of the Project, as the courts left all of the 2020 Project approvals intact.
By certifying the 2024 Final EIR, the City Council would put the City into a position whereby the City Attorney, working with the Project applicant, could ask the Superior Court to discharge the pending Peremptory Writ of Mandate. If the Court agrees with the City and applicant that the FSEIR and the associated responses to comments satisfy the directives from the Modified Court of Appeal Opinion, the Revised Judgment, and Peremptory Writ of Mandate, the Court would lift the current suspension of Project-related activities that can adversely affect the environment. At that point, the Project could proceed with development once all required City permits have been obtained.
Council Goals/Objectives: Adoption of Resolution No. 2024-66 certifying the Supplement to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Dorsey Marketplace Project supports the 2022 Strategic Plan Update Goal # 4, by which the City of Grass Valley encourages a robust and sustainable economy that reflects diverse employment opportunities that support the values of Grass Valley, and Goal # 5, by which the City of Grass Valley strives to exemplify an innovative, efficient, effective, open and collaborative city government.
Fiscal Impact: There is no fiscal impact to the City; Preparation of the SFEIR and construction of the Project are funded at the applicant’s expense, as City policy requires.
Funds Available: N/A Account #: N/A
Reviewed by: City Manager
Attachments:
Dorsey Marketplace Site Plan, Alternative B (approved project) Resolution No. 2024-66, Certifying SFEIR with Exhibit A (2024 EIR) Supplement to the Final EIR (SFEIR)
Response to Comments to the SFEIR and Errata
Public Comments (received prior to publishing)
Item # 11.
Item # 11.
1 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-66
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRASS VALLEY
CERTIFYING THE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
FOR THE DORSEY MARKETPLACE PROJECT
WHEREAS, in December 2015, the R. Jeter Family Trust (“the Applicant”) submitted applications for a General Plan Amendment, Zoning Map Amendment, Development Review Permit, and Use Permit for a proposed mixed-use development known as the Dorsey Marketplace on a 26.8-acre infill site within the City of Grass Valley (“City”) (the “Project”); and WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.) (“CEQA”) and the State CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., tit.14, § 15000 et seq.), City staff determined that an Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) should be prepared to analyze all potentially adverse environmental impacts of the Project; and WHEREAS, in early 2016, the City selected a consultant, Dudek, to prepare the EIR for the Project; and
WHEREAS, as Dudek began working on technical studies, an issue arose with potential impacts to one of the State Route (“SR”) 20/49 interchanges and, additionally, the Applicant began revisiting the land use mix based on nationwide trends impacting the retail market; and WHEREAS, in July 2017, the Applicant developed an alternative site plan (“Alternative B”) that, compared with the original proposal, reduced the commercial area and increased the number of residential units; and
WHEREAS, the City prepared a Draft EIR for the Project that analyzed both Alternative A (the original proposal) and Alternative B, and provided a 45-day public review period from March 22 to May 6, 2019; and
WHEREAS, on April 16, 2019, the City’s Planning Commission held a public hearing to receive public comments on the adequacy of the Draft EIR; and WHEREAS, the City’s Development Review Committee reviewed the design elements of the two proposed project alternatives at public meetings held on May 28 and August 27, 2019, and recommended that the City Council support Alternative B; and WHEREAS, in October 2019, the City issued a proposed Final Environmental Impact Report (“Final EIR”) for the Project; and
WHEREAS, on December 3, 2019, the Planning Commission independently reviewed, analyzed and considered the Final EIR, as well as the related proposed Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations, prior to making its recommendation on the Project; and
WHEREAS, on December 3, 2019, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the General Plan Amendment, Zoning Map Amendment, Development Review Permit, and Use Permit applications and considered the Final EIR, and recommended,
Item # 11.
2 by a vote of five to zero, that the City Council certify the Final EIR and approve Alternative B; and
WHEREAS, on April 28, 2020, the City Council certified the Final EIR (the “2020 Final EIR”), adopted the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations, and approved Alternative B, including the required applications for a General Plan Amendment, Zoning Map Amendment, Development Review Permit, and Use Permit; and WHEREAS, on August 3, 2020, Community Environmental Advocates, Community Environmental Advocates Foundation, Protect Grass Valley and Ralph A. Silberstein (collectively, “Petitioners”) filed a petition for writ of mandate in Nevada County Superior Court challenging the City Council’s certification of the 2020 Final EIR and approval of the Project; and
WHEREAS, on June 18, 2021, following briefing by the parties and a hearing on the merits, the Superior Court issued a “Final Ruling on Petition for Writ of Mandate (CEQA),” in which the court rejected all of Petitioners’ arguments attacking the 2020 Final EIR; and WHEREAS, on July 27, 2021, the Superior Court issued a judgment in favor of the City and the Applicant, which denied the petition for writ of mandate in its entirety; and WHEREAS, on July 29, 2021, the Petitioners appealed the trial court’s decision; and WHEREAS, on February 28, 2023, the Third District Court of Appeal issued a Modified Opinion affirming the trial court’s ruling and judgment except in one respect, rejecting all of Petitioners’ challenges to the EIR but one; and
WHEREAS, the one flaw in the EIR identified by the Court of Appeal was the EIR’s failure to adequately analyze the potential health effects to Project residents and occupants in the year 2035 from mobile source pollution resulting from Project traffic using SR 20/49; and WHEREAS, on October 19, 2023, on remand from the Court of Appeal, the trial court issued a new judgment consistent with the modified opinion of the Court of Appeal (“Revised Judgment”), as well as a Peremptory Writ of Mandate directing the City to suspend all Project activities that could adversely affect the physical environment and to address the deficiencies in the EIR identified in the modified Court of Appeal opinion; and WHEREAS, on February 3, 2024, the City published a Notice of Availability for the Supplement to the Final Environmental Impact Report (“SFEIR”) for the Project, and held a 45- day public review period through March 19, 2024; and
WHEREAS, the SFEIR analyzes the potential health effects to Project residents and occupants in the present and the year 2035 from mobile source pollution due to Project traffic using SR 20/49, including all of the following:
• the analysis considers existing residents in the vicinity of the Dorsey Marketplace Project site as well as future Dorsey Marketplace residents and occupants;
Item # 11.
3 • the analysis considers potential effects under the “no Project” and “with Project” scenarios in the year 2023 (existing) and year 2035 (cumulative) conditions; • the analysis considers the potential health effects to receptors at various distances within 1,000 feet of the SR 20/49 travel lanes;
• the analysis focuses on the effects of diesel particulate matter and total organic gases from on-road vehicles, reflecting the total average daily trips and vehicle fleet mix (i.e., percentages of various types of vehicles, such as passenger cars and trucks, light duty trucks, and heavy duty trucks);
• the analysis relies on the results of air dispersion models that calculate how pollutants are transported from the emission source to particular points at various distances from the pollutant source to calculate the concentration of pollutants that are expected to reach existing and future sensitive receptors in the Project vicinity; and
• the conclusions regarding health risk are based on the cancer risk and chronic health effect risks associated with the identified exposure rates; and WHEREAS, the SFEIR concludes that traffic from the Project on SR 20/49 would not significantly exacerbate environmental hazards and associated human health effects from mobile source emissions on SR 20/49 from traffic unrelated to the Project either in the present or in 2035; and
WHEREAS, on September 10, 2024, the City added the SFEIR, along with the public comments received on the SFEIR and the responses to those comments, to the 2020 certified Final EIR and provided the resulting new and expanded Final EIR (“the 2024 Final EIR”) to the City Council to review and consider, and to determine whether the deficiency identified in the modified Court of Appeal opinion, the Revised Judgment, and the Peremptory Writ of Mandate have been corrected before implementing the previously suspended Project activities; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that 2024 Final EIR, attached hereto as Exhibit A, is in compliance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines insofar as the 2024 Final EIR corrects the deficiency in the 2020 Final EIR described in the modified Court of Appeal opinion, the Revised Judgment, and the Peremptory Writ of Mandate; and WHEREAS, the City Council, having determined that the deficiencies in the previously certified 2020 Final EIR have been corrected in the 2024 Final EIR, reinstates the previously suspended Project activities as permitted by the Revised Judgment and Peremptory Writ of Mandate.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that:
1. The City Council hereby finds the certified 2024 Final EIR, including the 2020 Final EIR, the SFEIR, the comments on the SFEIR, and the responses to those comments (all attached hereto as Exhibit A), addresses all environmental effects of the Project and fully complies with the requirements of CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, the modified Court of Appeal opinion, the Revised Judgment, and the Peremptory Writ of Mandate. All of the information comprising the new Final EIR is on file with the Grass Valley Community Development Department,125 E. Main Street, Grass
Item # 11.
4 Valley, California. This finding of legal adequacy extends only, however, to the portions of the document modified in response to the directives of the Court of Appeal in the Modified Opinion, as the Court of Appeal did not require the City Council to vacate its certification of the previously certified 2020 Final EIR or to set aside any Project approvals, and the City Council did not do so. Because the prior certification was left undisturbed, this finding renders the entirety of the 2024 Final EIR adequate to reinstate the previously suspended Project activities as permitted by the Revised Judgment and Peremptory Writ of Mandate. Those suspended Project Activities are hereby reinstated.
2. The City Council hereby certifies that the 2024 Final EIR, and specifically the revisions made in the SFEIR in response to the modified Court of Appeal opinion, Revised Judgment, and Peremptory Writ of Mandate, were presented to the Council as the decision-making body of the lead agency, and that the Council reviewed and considered the information contained in the 2024 Final EIR prior to making its determination that the deficiencies in the previously certified 2020 Final EIR identified in the modified Court of Appeal opinion, Revised Judgment, and Peremptory Writ of Mandate have been corrected.
3. The City Council finds the 2024 Final EIR reflects the independent judgment of the City of Grass Valley.
4. The City Council finds that no significant new information within the meaning of CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5 has required additional analysis on remand from the Court of Appeal beyond the analysis required by the modified Court of Appeal opinion, the Revised Judgment, and the Peremptory Writ of Mandate.
5. In light of the Superior Court’s continuing jurisdiction under Public Resources Code section 21168.9, subdivision (b), the City Attorney, working with counsel for the Applicant, shall file with the Superior Court a return to the Peremptory Writ of Mandate and a Motion to Discharge the Peremptory Writ of Mandate.
ADOPTED as a resolution of the City Council of the City of Grass Valley at a regular meeting held on the __ day of _________ 2024 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAINING:
____________________________
Jan Arbuckle, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:
_____________________________ ____________________________ Michael G. Colantuono, City Attorney Taylor Day Whittingslow, City Clerk
Item # 11.
5 Exhibit A
o 2019 Final EIR
o Supplement to the Final EIR (SFEIR)
o Comments to the SFEIR
o Response to Comments to the SFEIR and Errata
(Available by clicking this link due to file size)
Item # 11.
Prepared for:
CITY OF GRASS VALLEY
125 E Main Street
Grass Valley, CA, 95945
CONTACT:
Amy Wolfson
City Planner
(530) 274-4711
[email protected]
Prepared by:
853 Lincoln Way, Suite 105
Auburn, CA 95603
T 800.450.1818
DORSEY MARKETPLACE
SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL
ENVIROMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
SCH# 2016022053
February 2024
Item # 11.
Item # 11.
Supplement to the Final
Environmental Impact Report
Dorsey Marketplace Project
FEBRUARY 2024
Prepared for:
CITY OF GRASS VALLEY
125 E Main Street
Grass Valley, California 95945
Contact: Amy Wolfson
Prepared by:
853 Lincoln Way, Suite 105
Auburn, California 95603
Contact: Katherine Waugh
Item # 11.
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Item # 11.
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 TOC-1
Table of Contents
SECTION PAGE NO.
1 Introduction
1.1 Background and Purpose of the Supplement to the Final EIR .......................................... 1-1
1.2 Scope of the Partially Recirculated Draft EIR...................................................................... 1-3
1.3 Summary Project Description .............................................................................................. 1-4
1.4 Public Review of the Supplement to Final EIR .................................................................... 1-6
1.5 References Cited .................................................................................................................. 1-8 2 Air Quality
2.1 Environmental Setting .......................................................................................................... 2-1
2.1.1 Climate and Topography ......................................................................................... 2-1
2.1.2 Criteria Air Pollutants .............................................................................................. 2-2
2.1.3 Toxic Air Contaminants ........................................................................................... 2-6
2.1.4 Nevada County Attainment Designation ................................................................ 2-7
2.1.5 Local Ambient Air Quality ........................................................................................ 2-8
2.1.6 Sensitive Receptors ................................................................................................ 2-9
2.2 Regulatory Framework ......................................................................................................... 2-9
2.2.1 Federal Regulations ................................................................................................ 2-9
2.2.2 State Regulations .................................................................................................. 2-10
2.2.3 Local Regulations .................................................................................................. 2-14
2.3 Significance Criteria and Methodology .............................................................................. 2-16
2.3.1 Thresholds of Significance ................................................................................... 2-16
2.3.2 Approach and Methodology .................................................................................. 2-18
2.3.3 Modeling Uncertainties ......................................................................................... 2-21
2.4 Impact Analysis ................................................................................................................... 2-23
2.4.1 Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................. 2-27
2.5 References Cited ................................................................................................................ 2-27 3 List of Preparers
3.1 City of Grass Valley ............................................................................................................... 3-1
3.2 Dudek .................................................................................................................................... 3-1
Item # 11.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 TOC-2
TABLES
Table 2-1. Nevada County Attainment Classification .................................................................................... 2-7 Table 2-2. Local Ambient Air Quality Data ...................................................................................................... 2-8 Table 2-3. Ambient Air Quality Standards .................................................................................................... 2-10 Table 2-4. Recommendations on Siting New Sensitive Land Uses Near Air Pollutant Sources ............... 2-13 Table 2-5. BAAQMD Thresholds of Significance .......................................................................................... 2-17 Table 2-6. Summary of Maximum Cancer and Chronic Health Risks and PM2.5 Concentrations (Baseline Scenario) ........................................................................................................................................... 2-23 Table 2-7. Summary of Maximum Cancer and Chronic Health Risks and PM2.5 Concentrations (Cumulative Scenario) ........................................................................................................................................... 2-24 FIGURE
Figure 1. Site Plan ............................................................................................................................................ 1-9
APPENDICES
Appendix M Judgment and Peremptory Writ of Mandate in Case No. CU20-084791, Community Environmental Advocates, Community Environmental Advocates FoundaƟon, Protect Grass Valley and Ralph A. Silberstein v. City of Grass Valley, Nevada County Superior Court
Appendix N Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health PerspecƟve, California Air Resources Board
Appendix O Health Risk Assessment, Dudek
Item # 11.
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 1-1
1 Introduction
In April 2020, the City of Grass Valley (City) certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR; State Clearinghouse Number 2016022053) and approved the Dorsey Marketplace Project. The Project proposes a mixed-use development including commercial, office, and residential uses on the site of the former Spring Hill Mine along State Route (SR) 20/49, bounded by SR 20/49 to the west, Dorsey Drive to the north, commercial property to the south, and residential property to the east. Refer to Section 1.3 for additional details of the Project Description.
The City’s certification of the EIR for this Project was challenged in court, and the Court of Appeal found that the EIR did not adequately address potential human health effects associated with mobile source air pollution emanating from SR 20/49. Accordingly, on October 19, 2023, the Nevada County Superior Court issued a judgment and peremptory writ of mandate directing the City to correct the deficiencies in the EIR’s analysis of SR 20/49 as a contributor of mobile source emissions, the associated health risks for future Project residents and occupants, and the degree to which the Project’s contribution of vehicle trips on SR 20/49 may exacerbate these risks. The judgment and writ also ordered that the City and Project applicant suspend any Project activity or activities that could result in an adverse change or alteration to the physical environment until the City has taken the necessary actions to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21000 et seq). The Superior Court did not require the City Council to set aside the resolutions by which, in April 2020, the City Council certified the original EIR and approved the Project. Those resolutions stand, although the Project cannot proceed until the City completes the environmental analysis ordered by the two courts.
Consistent with the Superior Court judgment, this Supplement to the Final EIR (SFEIR) has been prepared to present analysis of the potential human health effects due to exposure to mobile source air pollution generated by vehicle traffic on State Route 20/49 for residents within 500 feet of the freeway.
1.1 Background and Purpose of the Supplement to
the Final EIR
As noted above, this SFEIR has been prepared to comply with the October 19, 2023, Nevada Superior Court Judgment and Peremptory Writ of Mandate in Case No. CU20-084791, Community Environmental Advocates, Community Environmental Advocates Foundation, Protect Grass Valley and Ralph A. Silberstein (collectively, “Petitioners”) v. City of Grass Valley. For ease of reference, these two documents will hereinafter be referred to together as the “Ruling” of the Superior Court; they are included in this SFEIR as Appendix M. This Ruling was the result of litigation that began in the summer of 2020.
On April 28, 2020, the City of Grass Valley certified a Final EIR for the Dorsey Marketplace Project (“Project” or “Dorsey Marketplace”) and approved the Project. The Project entitlements include a General Plan Amendment, a Zone Change, a Development Review Permit and a Use Permit for drive-through facilities and a Lot Line Adjustment. The Final EIR consisted of the Draft EIR published in March 2019 and the Final EIR published in November 2019. In August 2020, the adequacy of the Final EIR was challenged by a Petition for Writ of Mandate. The trial court found in favor of the City and the Petitioners appealed that decision.
Item # 11.
1 - INTRODUCTION
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 1-2
The Court of Appeal, however, found one problem with the Final EIR – its failure to analyze the potential health effects to Project residents and occupants in the year 2035 due to traffic using SR 20/49. Ruling in early 2023, the Court of Appeal rejected all other arguments made by the Petitioners on appeal. Citing the California Air Resources Board’s (CARB) Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective (CARB Handbook, which is included in this SFEIR as Appendix N), the Court of Appeal explained its reasoning on the air quality/health impact issue as follows:
“The City argues that the EIR did analyze whether the project’s contribution to traffic to SR 20/49 could exacerbate existing hazards associated with mobile source pollution. Relying on the CARB Handbook, the City argues the EIR concluded there was no evidence that the project would create a new health risk or substantially exacerbate any existing significant health risks to existing or future residents. We take no issue with the City’s reliance on the CARB Handbook as a threshold of significance, but we conclude it was misapplied here.
According to the CARB Handbook, air pollution studies indicate that living close to high traffic roadways may lead to adverse health effects, including asthma and reduced lung function. A key observation in the studies is that proximity to the roadway, truck traffic densities, and local meteorology (wind patterns) were key factors affecting the strength of association with adverse health effects. The studies reported an association of adverse health effects with proximity to traffic-related emissions within 1,000 feet, with the strongest association within 300 feet, and a 70 percent drop off in particulate pollution levels at 500 feet. Based on these studies, the CARB Handbook recommends against siting new residences and other sensitive receptors within 500 feet of a freeway, urban roads with 100,000 vehicles per day, or rural roads with 50,000 vehicles per day.
Under Alternative B [i.e., the project as approved], the nearest residences in the proposed project would be sited about 170 feet from the SR 20/49 travel lanes, well within the 500- foot recommended buffer. The City nevertheless determined that a detailed health risk assessment was not required. Because total traffic volume on SR 20/49 was below the rural significance threshold of 50,000 vehicles per day, the City concluded “there [was] no significant health risk that the project could exacerbate.” Other information in the EIR, however, shows that the average daily traffic volume for SR 20/49 is expected to increase to 56,000 vehicles by 2035, and that the proposed project would add an additional 1,000 daily vehicle trips to that total. Thus, the total traffic volume would exceed the 50,000-daily-vehicles threshold described in the CARB Handbook under existing-plus-project future conditions. Future residents of the project would be exposed to substantial concentrations of toxic air contaminants associated with SR 20/49.
It follows that SR 20/49 is a potentially significant source of hazardous automobile emissions that the proposed project risks exacerbating. As a result, the project’s potentially significant exacerbating effects should have been evaluated in the EIR.
Since the EIR failed to evaluate the potential impact of such emissions on future residents and users, the EIR did not contain sufficient analysis to enable those who did not participate in its preparation to understand and meaningfully consider the extent to which the project could adversely affect the health of the project’s occupants [citations omitted].
The fact that the project design incorporates certain strategies to minimize exposure to toxic air contaminants does not alter this conclusion. The EIR does not give any sense of the nature or magnitude of the potential health risks posed by the project’s proximity to SR
Item # 11.
1 - INTRODUCTION
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 1-3
20/49, or the relative effectiveness of the pollution reduction strategies. The draft EIR did not even mention SR 20/49 as a potential emission source, let alone quantify the emissions and correlate them to potential health risks. Thus, even if the strategies help minimize exposure to toxic air contaminants, it is impossible on this record to conclude that they reduced the project’s potentially significant exacerbating effects to less than significant. We therefore agree with plaintiffs that the EIR failed to evaluate adequately the human health effects of project residents’ exposure to mobile source air pollution” (Appendix M).
On October 19, 2023, on remand from the Court of Appeal, the Nevada Superior Court issued its Ruling, which modified the original Superior Court judgment to be consistent with the Court of Appeal opinion and addressed the issue of remedy. The Ruling rejected all but one of the contentions made by the Petitioners regarding the City’s compliance with CEQA. The Ruling did determine, however, that the Final EIR did not comply with the requirements of CEQA because “it does not evaluate adequately State Route (SR) 20/49 as a contributor of mobile source pollution and the associated health risks for future project occupants.” The Court directed the City to remedy the air quality analysis in the EIR by providing an assessment of the human health effects associated with exposure to mobile source air pollution generated by vehicle traffic on State Route 20/49 for Project residents and occupants, particularly to address whether the Project could exacerbate an environmental hazard because the Final EIR noted that in the year 2035, SR 20/49 was projected to support daily traffic volumes of 56,000 vehicles, which exceeds the 50,000 vehicles per day threshold recommended in the CARB Handbook (Appendix N) regarding the proximity of residential land uses to air pollutant sources (CARB 2005).
1.2 Scope of the Partially Recirculated Draft EIR
Under Public Resources Code Section 21168.9(b), CEQA requires that a court’s order include only those mandates that are necessary to achieve compliance with CEQA. Because the Court of Appeal found the Dorsey Marketplace EIR to be deficient only in respect to the lack of a Health Risk Assessment (HRA) and rejected numerous other challenges made to the 2020 Final EIR, that Final EIR is considered to be legally adequate in all other respects. Therefore, this Supplement to the Final EIR (SFEIR) addresses only the issue of potential health effects to future project residents and occupants due to exposure to mobile source air pollution from traffic on SR 20/49, including the Project’s potential to exacerbate health effects by contributing traffic to SR 20/49. No other portion of the 2019 EIR is revised or supplemented.
The reasons why the City is treating this environmental document as a Supplement to the April 2020 Final EIR are explained in detail in section 1.4 below. The rules governing the preparation of supplements to EIRs are found in CEQA Guidelines section 15162. (The CEQA Guidelines are found in California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3.) Subdivision (b) provides that “[t]he supplement to the EIR need contain only the information necessary to make the previous EIR adequate for the project as revised.” Subdivision (c) adds that “[a] supplement to an EIR shall be given the same kind of notice and public review as is given to a draft EIR under Section 15087.” Subdivision (d) states that “[a] supplement to an EIR may be circulated by itself without recirculating the previous draft or final EIR.” Consistent with these rules, this SFEIR will be circulated for a 45-day public review without the existing Final EIR. This SFEIR includes a new Air Quality technical section that evaluates the significance of potential health risk impacts based on the findings of the HRA. This document will become part of an updated Final EIR, as will any timely comments received on the SFEIR and written responses to any significant environmental issues raised in those timely comments.
Item # 11.
1 - INTRODUCTION
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 1-4
Approach to the Analysis
The environmental analysis contained within this SFEIR augments the previous evaluation of environmental impacts contained in the 2019 EIR to provide a more detailed analysis of potential human health effects due to proximity to SR 20/49. The analysis in this SFEIR relies on information from the 2019 EIR (which includes both the Draft and Final EIRs), as well as the new HRA provided in Appendix O. A detailed discussion of the methodology used to conduct the HRA is presented in Section 2.3.2 of this document. In summary:
the analysis considers existing residents in the vicinity of the Dorsey Marketplace Project site as well as future Dorsey Marketplace residents and occupants; the analysis considers potential effects under the ‘no Project’ and ‘with Project’ scenarios in the year 2023 (existing) and year 2035 (cumulative) conditions; the analysis considers the potential health effects to receptors at various distances within 1,000 feet of the SR 20/49 travel lanes;
the analysis focuses on the effects of diesel particulate matter and total organic gases from onroad vehicles, reflecting the total average daily trips and vehicle fleet mix (i.e., percentages of various types of vehicles, such as passenger cars and trucks, light duty trucks, and heavy duty trucks);
the analysis relies on the results of air dispersion models that calculate how pollutants are transported from the emission source to particular points at various distances from the pollutant source to calculate the concentration of pollutants that are expected to reach existing and future sensitive receptors in the Project vicinity; and
the conclusions regarding health risk are based on the cancer risk and chronic health effect risks associated with the identified exposure rates.
1.3 Summary Project Description
The 2019 Draft EIR discusses two Alternatives in the Project Description, labeled Alternative A and Alternative B. The City approved Alternative B, which is planned to include development of approximately 172 residential apartments 104,350 square feet of commercial land uses, and 8,500 square feet of office space. A summary of the Alternative B Project components is presented in this section and, for purposes of this document, the terms “Alternative B” and “Project” are used interchangeably. A detailed description of Alternative B is presented in Section 2.5 of the 2019 Draft EIR, beginning on page 2-10; the 2019 Draft EIR is available at the City’s website:
https://www.cityofgrassvalley.com/pod/active-projects
The Project site consists of 26.8 acres within three parcels located on the south side of Dorsey Drive. Land uses surrounding the site include multi-family residential to the north and east, SR 20/49 to the west, and commercial property to the south.
Item # 11.
1 - INTRODUCTION
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 1-5
In approving Alternative B, the City Council approved a General Plan Amendment and rezone changing the land use designation on the site from Business Park (26.8 acres) to Commercial (14.5 acres) and Residential Urban High Density (12.3 acres). Alternative B also required a rezone from Corporate Business Park to 14.5 acres of Commercial (C-2) and 12.3 acres of Multiple Dwelling Residential (R-3).
As shown in Figure 1, Site Plan, Alternative B would develop 104,350 square feet of commercial uses, including two major shops (35,000 and 21,500 square feet), five smaller shops (with sizes between 4,000 and 8,500 square feet), three pads for drive-through services such as fast-food and financial institutions (sizes between 3,200 and 4,200 square feet) and one 6,000-sqare-foot pad that would support food service without a drive-through. The commercial uses would be placed throughout the northern portion of the Project site, with the major shops and two of the small shops along the western boundary, the restaurant pads in the northeastern portion of the site near the Project site entrance on Dorsey Drive, and the additional three small shops completing the southwestern portion of the commercial area perimeter. Parking would be provided central to all of the commercial uses, and would include electric vehicle charging stations.
The 172 residential apartments included in Alternative B would be constructed as two-story and three-story buildings in the southern portion of the Project site. The apartments would be market-rate rental units and are expected to include 95 two-bedroom units and 38 each of the one- and three-bedroom layouts. The units would range in size from 1,013 to 1,600 square feet. One of the buildings would include approximately 50% apartment space and 50% office space, providing 8,500 square feet of office space near the center of the Project site. The Project would also include an apartment complex clubhouse, pool, tot lot, and dog park.
Vehicles would circulate through the Project site using a north-south central spine road connecting to Dorsey Drive on the north and Spring Hill Drive on the south. Bicycle lanes would be striped on each side of the street and bus stop shelters would be provided near the center of the site. A network of landscaped walkways and pedestrian plazas would be provided throughout the Project site.
Several Project elements would serve to reduce potential air quality effects on residents and occupants at the project site. These include:
Under Mitigation Measure 9a, a 6-foot-tall sound wall will be constructed in the southwestern portion of the project site, between the residences proposed in that portion of the site and SR 20/49. Findings of CARB’s Technical Advisory: Strategies to Reduce Air Pollution Exposure Near High-Volume Roadways indicate that these sound walls would provide vertical dispersion of pollutants which would reduce the concentration of toxic air contaminants within the Project site (CARB 2017).
Under Mitigation Measure 5a, landscaping meeting specific performance standards regarding the density and height of vegetation would be installed within the minimum 50-foot-wide buffer between the SR 20/49 Dorsey Drive off-ramp and the onsite parking lots. Findings of CARB’s Technical Advisory: Strategies to Reduce Air Pollution Exposure Near High-Volume Roadways indicate that particulate matter can be deposited on vegetation, which would reduce the concentration of toxic air contaminants within the Project site (CARB 2017). The proposed buildings nearest SR 20/49 under Alternative B are comprised of two apartment buildings separated by a drive aisle and parking spaces. This creates an open area between the
Item # 11.
1 - INTRODUCTION
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 1-6
buildings that allows for air flow to disperse pollutants as indicted by the findings of CARB’s Technical Advisory: Strategies to Reduce Air Pollution Exposure Near High-Volume Roadways Technical Advisory that features such as “building articulations (street frontage design elements like edges and corners that help break up building mass), and spaces that encourage air flow (e.g., parks)” reduce individuals’ exposure to air pollution and associated health effects (CARB 2017).
1.4 Public Review of the Supplement to Final EIR
Because the court directed the City to suspend all Project activities that could result in an adverse change or alteration to the physical environment until the City has taken the necessary actions to comply with CEQA, the status of the City’s environmental review process for the Project is akin to that of a lead agency that has certified an EIR, but determined that “some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred,” As stated in CEQA Guidelines Section 15164. Thus, the legal principles applicable in such a situation are relevant.
PRC Section 21166 provides that no subsequent or supplemental EIR will be required unless “substantial changes” to the project or circumstances require “major revisions” to the EIR, or “new information, which was not known and could not have been known at the time the environmental impact report was certified as complete, becomes available.” CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(3), provides further guidance on the types of “new information” that trigger the need for a subsequent EIR. Specifically, the new information must be of “substantial importance” and show:
“a) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration;
b) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR;
c) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or d) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.” CEQA Guidelines Section 15163 addresses the circumstances in which a supplement to an EIR, rather than a full subsequent EIR, should be prepared. Subdivision (a) of that section provides that “The Lead or Responsible Agency may choose to prepare a supplement to an EIR rather than a subsequent EIR if: (1) Any of the conditions described in Section 15162 would require the preparation of a subsequent EIR, and (2) Only minor additions or changes would be necessary to make the previous EIR adequately apply to the project in the changed situation.”
In the absence of circumstances triggering either a subsequent EIR or a supplement to an EIR under PRC Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15163, CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 permits the agency to prepare an addendum with any necessary “changes or additions” to the previously certified EIR. Section 15164 further provides that an addendum need not be circulated for public comment but can be included with the final EIR and “shall” be considered by the decision-making body along with the final EIR “prior to making a decision on the project.” Here, the Court’s Ruling requires the City to consider this
Item # 11.
1 - INTRODUCTION
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 1-7
document in determining whether the deficiencies identified in the Ruling have been adequately addressed before “choos[ing] to permit the implementation of any and all previously suspended Project activities and Project Approvals.”
As established by the analysis included in this document, none of the conditions in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 have occurred. Nor is there any need to prepare a supplement to the prior EIR pursuant to Section 15163. Nevertheless, because the deficiency in the Final EIR identified by the Ruling was the failure “to analyze SR 20/49 as a contributor of mobile source emissions and the associated health risks for future Project residents and occupants” and because the public has not had an opportunity to comment on this “analysis of SR 20/49 as a contributor of mobile source emissions and the associated health risks for future Project residents and occupants,” the City has elected to circulate this document for public comment and has decided to call it a Supplement to the November 2019 Final EIR.1 After this SFEIR is circulated for public review and the City has responded in writing to all public comments raising “significant environmental issues” related to the revised air quality analysis included in this document, this SFEIR, together with those responses, will be added to the original November 2019 Final EIR in order to create a new Final EIR. Once that document is ready, it will be submitted to the City Council for possible certification.
If the City Council certifies the new Final EIR, the previously suspended Project activities will be able to proceed.
In light of the foregoing, the City directs that public comments submitted in response to the SFEIR address only the new information presented herein, specifically Draft EIR Impact 10-4 (which is addressed in this SFEIR as Impact 2.4.1) and the HRA (Appendix O), and shall not address all other impacts and analysis presented in the remainder of the 2019 Final EIR which are not being recirculated. Because the Final EIR was upheld in all other respects, the portions of that document other than those that are being changed and/or updated are not in contention. In other words, the recirculation of the SFEIR is not an opportunity to re-submit comments on previously published topics or to add additional comments on previously published topics. Readers are therefore requested not to make comments on issues not directly implicated by this SFEIR and the City will not respond to any new comments that are directed to other portions of the November 2019 Final EIR.
The SFEIR will be subject to review and comment by the public, as well as all responsible agencies and other interested parties, agencies and organizations for a period of no less than 45 days. The SFEIR will be available for public review and comments during the period from February 3, 2023, through March 19, 2023. Comments should be sent to the City at the following address:
1 The City’s decision to undertake formal public review is done on a voluntary basis. Where a court has found flaws in an EIR and remands the matter back to the lead agency for further work, the process required on remand is a function of whether the changes to be made to the EIR would constitute “significant new information” triggering full or partial recirculation or, as here, a subsequent EIR or supplement to an EIR. (Protect the Historic Amador Waterways v. Amador Water Agency (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th 1099, 1112; Lotus v. Department of Transportation (2014) 223 Cal.App.4th 645, 658.) Here, neither the Court of Appeal nor the Superior Court ordered public review. The City has opted to do so, with the applicant’s agreement, out of a desire to maximize transparency and to facilitate additional public input.
Item # 11.
1 - INTRODUCTION
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 1-8
Ms. Amy Wolfson
City of Grass Valley
125 E. Main Street
Grass Valley, California 95945
or by email directed to Ms. Wolfson at: [email protected].
Following the close of the comment period, the City will prepare written responses to any significant environmental issues raised in timely comments on the SFEIR. These responses will be folded into a new Final EIR that will consist of the original (November 2019) Final EIR, the SFEIR, and the new responses to comments (and any Errata that might be generated during review of comments on the SFEIR). These documents, taken together, will comprise the modified and expanded Final EIR for the Project.
Once they are complete, the new responses to comments will be published and made available to commenting agencies (if any) a minimum of ten days prior to a hearing by the Grass Valley City Council to consider whether to certify the new Final EIR. As stated above, the City will consider this SFEIR document, along with any public comments raising “significant environmental issues” related to the revised air quality analysis included in this document, and any written responses to comments in determining whether the deficiencies identified in the Ruling and Modified Opinion have been adequately addressed before “choos[ing] to permit the implementation of any and all previously suspended Project activities and Project Approvals.” Once the City Council is satisfied that the deficiencies identified in the Ruling have been adequately addressed, the City will file a Return to the Writ, as directed by the trial court in paragraph 2 of the Peremptory Writ of Mandate.
1.5 References Cited
California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2017. Technical Advisory Strategies to Reduce Air Pollution Exposure Near High-Volume Roadways. April 2017.
Item # 11.
Site Plan
Dorsey Marketplace SFEIR
FIGURE 1
SOURCE: Williams + Paddon 2017
Path: Z:\Projects\j947801\MAPDOC\DPCUMENT\EIR
Item # 11.
1 - INTRODUCTION
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 1-10
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Item # 11.
2 – AIR QUALITY
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 2-1
2 Air Quality
This section describes the existing air quality conditions present within and around the Dorsey Marketplace (Project) site and vicinity, identifies associated regulatory requirements, and evaluates potential human health impacts related to air pollution emissions resulting from operation of the Project. Emissions from construction activities are not addressed because neither the Court of Appeal nor the Superior Court found any inadequacy in the existing analysis of construction emissions. As discussed in Chapter 1, Introduction, this analysis is focused on the potential human health effects associated with mobile source air pollution (from trucks and cars) due to the Project site’s proximity to State Route 20/49 and the Project’s contribution to SR 20/49 traffic volumes.
The Project is located adjacent to SR 20/49, which currently has an average daily traffic (ADT) volume of over 30,000 vehicles (Caltrans 2023). This section of the Supplement to the Final Environmental Impact Report (SFEIR) for the Project presents the findings of a Health Risk Assessment (HRA) analysis that estimates health risk impacts from roadway toxic air contaminants (TACs) at new residences, visitors, and employees at the commercial uses proposed by the Project as well as health risks associated with existing sensitive receptors within 1,000 feet of SR 20/49. The analysis in this HRA is based on dispersion modeling completed using the American Meteorological Society/Environmental Protection Agency Regulatory Model (AERMOD) Version 21112 and the Hotspots Analysis and Reporting Program Version 2 (HARP2) to evaluate potential health risks associated with the Project. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) thresholds of significance were used to address health impacts because the Northern Sierra Air Quality Management District (NSAQMD) has not established an equivalent approach, particularly for fine particulate matter (PM2.5) risk. For the relevant data, refer to Appendix N, Health Risk Assessment Data (prepared by Dudek in October 2023).
Additional sources reviewed to prepare this section include the BAAQMD California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Air Quality Guidelines and the Office of Environmental Health Hazards Assessment’s (OEHHA) 2015 Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments. Other sources consulted are listed in Section 2.5, References Cited.
2.1 Environmental Setting
Ambient air quality is generally affected by climatological conditions, the topography of the air basin, and the type and amounts of pollutants emitted. The Project site is located within the Mountain Counties Air Basin (MCAB). The MCAB includes portions of Amador, Calaveras, El Dorado, Mariposa, Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Sierra, and Tuolumne counties and is comprised of seven air districts. Nevada, Plumas, and Sierra counties are under the jurisdiction of the NSAQMD. This section describes relevant characteristics of the air basin, types of air pollutants, health effects, and existing air quality levels.
2.1.1 Climate and Topography
Mild, wet winters and hot, dry summers characterize the climate of central and western Nevada County.
Precipitation generally occurs between November and April. Prevailing winds are from the south and southwest, and local air quality is influenced by the transportation of emissions from upwind mobile and stationary pollution sources in Placer County, the Sacramento metropolitan area, and the San Francisco Bay area.
Item # 11.
2 – AIR QUALITY
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 2-2
Air quality in western Nevada County is also affected by inversion layers, which occur when a layer of warm air traps a layer of cold air beneath it, preventing vertical dispersion of air contaminants. Calm atmospheric conditions that contribute to the creation of these inversion layers frequently occur in the region during late fall and early spring.
The presence of an inversion layer results in higher concentrations of pollutants near ground level.
2.1.2 Criteria Air Pollutants
Criteria air pollutants are defined as pollutants for which the federal and state governments have established ambient air quality standards, or criteria, for outdoor concentrations to protect public health. The national and California standards have been set, with an adequate margin of safety, at levels above which concentrations could be harmful to human health and welfare. These standards are designed to protect the most sensitive persons from illness or discomfort. Pollutants of concern include ozone (O3), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), CO, sulfur dioxide (SO2), coarse particulate matter (PM10), fine particulate matter (PM2.5), and lead. In California, sulfates, vinyl chloride, hydrogen sulfide, and visibility-reducing particles are also regulated as criteria air pollutants. These pollutants, as well as TACs, are discussed in the following paragraphs.1 Ozone. O3 is a strong-smelling, pale blue, reactive, toxic chemical gas consisting of three oxygen atoms. It is a secondary pollutant formed in the atmosphere by a photochemical process involving the sun’s energy and O3 precursors. These precursors are mainly oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) and Reactive Organic Gasses (ROGs). The maximum effects of precursor emissions on O3 concentrations usually occur several hours after they are emitted and many miles from the source. Meteorology and terrain play major roles in O3 formation, and ideal conditions occur during summer and early autumn on days with low wind speeds or stagnant air, warm temperatures, and cloudless skies. O3 exists in the upper atmosphere ozone layer (stratospheric O3) and at the Earth’s surface in the troposphere (ground-level O3).2 The O3 that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) regulate as a criteria air pollutant is produced close to the ground level, where people live, exercise, and breathe. Ground-level O3 is a harmful air pollutant that causes numerous adverse health effects and is thus considered “bad” O3. Stratospheric, or “good,” O3 occurs naturally in the upper atmosphere, where it reduces the amount of ultraviolet light (i.e., solar radiation) entering the Earth’s atmosphere. Without the protection of the beneficial stratospheric O3 layer, plant and animal life would be seriously harmed.
O3 in the troposphere causes numerous adverse health effects; short-term exposures (lasting for a few hours) to O3 at levels typically observed in Southern California can result in breathing pattern changes, reduction of breathing capacity, increased susceptibility to infections, inflammation of the lung tissue, and some immunological changes (EPA 2013).
Inhalation of O3 causes inflammation and irritation of the tissues lining human airways, causing and worsening a variety of symptoms. Exposure to O3 can reduce the volume of air that the lungs breathe in, thereby causing shortness of breath. O3 in sufficient doses increases the permeability of lung cells, rendering them more susceptible to toxins and microorganisms. The occurrence and severity of health effects from O3 exposure vary widely among individuals, even when the dose and the duration of exposure are the same. Research shows adults and children who spend more time outdoors participating in vigorous physical activities are at greater risk from the harmful health effects of O3 exposure. While there are relatively few studies on the effects of O3 on children, the available studies show that 1 The descriptions of the criteria air pollutants and associated health effects are based on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s “Criteria Air Pollutants” (EPA 2022a), as well as the California Air Resources Board’s “Glossary” (CARB 2019a) and CARB’s “Common Air Pollutants” (CARB 2022a).
2 The troposphere is the layer of the Earth’s atmosphere nearest to the surface of the Earth. The troposphere extends outward about 5 miles at the poles and about 10 miles at the equator.
Item # 11.
2 – AIR QUALITY
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 2-3
children are no more or less likely to suffer harmful effects than adults. However, there are a number of reasons why children may be more susceptible to O3 and other pollutants. Children and teens spend nearly twice as much time outdoors and engaged in vigorous activities as adults. Children breathe more rapidly than adults and inhale more pollution per pound of their body weight than adults. Also, children are less likely than adults to notice their own symptoms and avoid harmful exposures. Further research may be able to better distinguish between health effects in children and adults. Children, adolescents, and adults who exercise or work outdoors, where O3 concentrations are the highest, are at the greatest risk of harm from this pollutant (CARB 2019b).
Nitrogen Dioxide. NO2 is a brownish, highly reactive gas that is present in all urban atmospheres. The major mechanism for the formation of NO2 in the atmosphere is the oxidation of the primary air pollutant nitric oxide (NO), which is a colorless, odorless gas. NOx plays a major role, together with ROGs, in the atmospheric reactions that produce O3. NOx is formed from fuel combustion under high temperature or pressure. In addition, NOx is an important precursor to acid rain and may affect both terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. The two major emissions sources are transportation and stationary fuel combustion sources such as electric utility and industrial boilers. NO2 can irritate the lungs, cause bronchitis and pneumonia, and lower resistance to respiratory infections (EPA 2016).
A large body of health science literature indicates that exposure to NO2 can induce adverse health effects. The strongest health evidence, and the health basis for the ambient air quality standards for NO2, results from controlled human exposure studies that show that NO2 exposure can intensify responses to allergens in allergic asthmatics.
In addition, a number of epidemiological studies have demonstrated associations between NO2 exposure and premature death, cardiopulmonary effects, decreased lung function growth in children, respiratory symptoms, emergency room visits for asthma, and intensified allergic responses. Infants and children are particularly at risk because they have disproportionately higher exposure to NO2 than adults due to their faster breathing rate for their body weight and their typically greater outdoor exposure duration. Several studies have shown that long-term NO2 exposure during childhood, the period of rapid lung growth, can lead to smaller lungs at maturity in children with higher levels of exposure compared to children with lower exposure levels. In addition, children with asthma have a greater degree of airway responsiveness compared with adult asthmatics. In adults, the greatest risk is to people who have chronic respiratory diseases, such as asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (CARB 2019c).
Carbon Monoxide. CO is a colorless, odorless gas formed by the incomplete combustion of hydrocarbon, or fossil fuels. CO is emitted almost exclusively from motor vehicles, power plants, refineries, industrial boilers, ships, aircraft, and trains. In urban areas, such as the Project location, automobile exhaust accounts for the majority of CO emissions. CO is a nonreactive air pollutant that dissipates relatively quickly; therefore, ambient CO concentrations generally follow the spatial and temporal distributions of vehicular traffic. CO concentrations are influenced by local meteorological conditions—primarily wind speed, topography, and atmospheric stability. CO from motor vehicle exhaust can become locally concentrated when surface-based temperature inversions are combined with calm atmospheric conditions, which is a typical situation at dusk in urban areas from November to February.
The highest levels of CO typically occur during the colder months of the year, when inversion conditions are more frequent.
CO is harmful because it binds to hemoglobin in the blood, reducing the ability of blood to carry oxygen. This interferes with oxygen delivery to the body’s organs. The most common effects of CO exposure are fatigue, headaches, confusion and reduced mental alertness, light-headedness, and dizziness due to inadequate oxygen delivery to the brain. For people with cardiovascular disease, short-term CO exposure can further reduce their body’s already compromised ability to respond to the increased oxygen demands of exercise, exertion, or stress.
Inadequate oxygen delivery to the heart muscle leads to chest pain and decreased exercise tolerance. Unborn babies whose mothers experience high levels of CO exposure during pregnancy are at risk of adverse developmental
Item # 11.
2 – AIR QUALITY
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 2-4
effects. Unborn babies, infants, elderly people, and people with anemia or with a history of heart or respiratory disease are most likely to experience health effects with exposure to elevated levels of CO (CARB 2019d).
Sulfur Dioxide. SO2 is a colorless, pungent gas formed primarily from incomplete combustion of sulfur-containing fossil fuels. The main sources of SO2 are coal and oil used in power plants and industries; as such, the highest levels of SO2 are generally found near large industrial complexes. In recent years, SO2 concentrations have been reduced by the increasingly stringent controls placed on stationary source emissions of SO2 and limits on the sulfur content of fuels.
Controlled human exposure and epidemiological studies show that children and adults with asthma are more likely to experience adverse responses with SO2 exposure, compared with the non-asthmatic population. Effects at levels near the 1-hour standard are those of asthma exacerbation, including bronchoconstriction accompanied by symptoms of respiratory irritation such as wheezing, shortness of breath, and chest tightness, especially during exercise or physical activity. Also, exposure at elevated levels of SO2 (above 1 part per million [ppm]) results in increased incidence of pulmonary symptoms and disease, decreased pulmonary function, and increased risk of mortality. Older people and people with cardiovascular disease or chronic lung disease (such as bronchitis or emphysema) are most likely to experience these adverse effects (CARB 2019e).
SO2 is of concern both because it is a direct respiratory irritant and because it contributes to the formation of sulfate and sulfuric acid in particulate matter (NRC 2005). People with asthma are of particular concern, both because they have increased baseline airflow resistance and because their SO2-induced increase in airflow resistance is greater than in healthy people, and it increases with the severity of their asthma (NRC 2005). SO2 is thought to induce airway constriction via neural reflexes involving irritant receptors in the airways (NRC 2005).
Particulate Matter. Particulate matter pollution consists of very small liquid and solid particles floating in the air, which can include smoke, soot, dust, salts, acids, and metals. Particulate matter can form when gases emitted from industries and motor vehicles undergo chemical reactions in the atmosphere. PM2.5 and PM10 represent fractions of particulate matter. PM10 consists of particulate matter that is 10 microns or less in diameter, which is about 1/7 the thickness of a human hair. Major sources of PM10 include crushing or grinding operations; dust stirred up by vehicles traveling on roads; wood-burning stoves and fireplaces; dust from construction, landfills, and agriculture; wildfires and brush/waste burning; industrial sources; windblown dust from open lands; and atmospheric chemical and photochemical reactions. PM2.5 consists of particulate matter that is 2.5 microns or less in diameter, which is roughly 1/28 the diameter of a human hair. PM2.5 results from fuel combustion (e.g., from motor vehicles and power generation and industrial facilities), residential fireplaces, and woodstoves. In addition, PM2.5 can be formed in the atmosphere from gases such as SOx, NOx, and ROG.
PM2.5 and PM10 pose a greater health risk than larger-size particles. When inhaled, these tiny particles can penetrate the human respiratory system’s natural defenses and damage the respiratory tract. PM2.5 and PM10 can increase the number and severity of asthma attacks, cause or aggravate bronchitis and other lung diseases, and reduce the body’s ability to fight infections. Very small particles of substances such as lead, sulfates, and nitrates can cause lung damage directly or be absorbed into the bloodstream, causing damage elsewhere in the body.
Additionally, these substances can transport adsorbed gases such as chlorides or ammonium into the lungs, also causing injury. Whereas PM10 tends to collect in the upper portion of the respiratory system, PM2.5 is so tiny that it can penetrate deeper into the lungs and damage lung tissue. Suspended particulates also damage and discolor surfaces on which they settle and produce haze and reduce regional visibility.
Item # 11.
2 – AIR QUALITY
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 2-5
A number of adverse health effects have been associated with exposure to both PM2.5 and PM10. For PM2.5, shortterm exposures (up to 24-hour duration) have been associated with premature mortality, increased hospital admissions for heart or lung causes, acute and chronic bronchitis, asthma attacks, emergency room visits, respiratory symptoms, and restricted activity days. These adverse health effects have been reported primarily in infants, children, and older adults with preexisting heart or lung diseases. In addition, of all the common air pollutants, PM2.5 is associated with the greatest proportion of adverse health effects related to air pollution, both in the United States and worldwide, based on the World Health Organization’s Global Burden of Disease Project.
Short-term exposures to PM10 have been associated primarily with worsening of respiratory diseases, including asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, leading to hospitalization and emergency department visits (CARB 2017).
Long-term exposure (months to years) to PM2.5 has been linked to premature death, particularly in people who have chronic heart or lung diseases, and reduced lung function growth in children. The effects of long-term exposure to PM10 are less clear, although several studies suggest a link between long-term PM10 exposure and respiratory mortality. The International Agency for Research on Cancer published a review in 2015 that concluded that particulate matter in outdoor air pollution causes lung cancer (CARB 2017a).
Lead. Lead in the atmosphere occurs as particulate matter. Sources of lead include leaded gasoline; the manufacturing of batteries, paints, ink, ceramics, and ammunition; and secondary lead smelters. Prior to 1978, mobile emissions were the primary source of atmospheric lead. Between 1978 and 1987, the phaseout of leaded gasoline reduced the overall inventory of airborne lead by nearly 95%. With the phaseout of leaded gasoline, secondary lead smelters, battery recycling, and manufacturing facilities are becoming lead-emissions sources of greater concern.
Prolonged exposure to atmospheric lead poses a serious threat to human health. Health effects associated with exposure to lead include gastrointestinal disturbances, anemia, kidney disease, and in severe cases, neuromuscular and neurological dysfunction. Of particular concern are low-level lead exposures during infancy and childhood. Such exposures are associated with decrements in neurobehavioral performance, including intelligence quotient (IQ) performance, psychomotor performance, reaction time, and growth. Children are highly susceptible to the effects of lead.
Sulfates. Sulfates are the fully oxidized form of sulfur and typically occur in combination with metals or hydrogen ions. Sulfates are produced from reactions of SO2 in the atmosphere and can result in respiratory impairment, as well as reduced visibility.
Vinyl Chloride. Vinyl chloride is a colorless gas with a mild, sweet odor, which has been detected near landfills, sewage plants, and hazardous waste sites, due to the microbial breakdown of chlorinated solvents. Short-term exposure to high levels of vinyl chloride in air can cause nervous system effects, such as dizziness, drowsiness, and headaches. Long-term exposure through inhalation can cause liver damage, including liver cancer.
Hydrogen Sulfide. Hydrogen sulfide is a colorless and flammable gas that has a characteristic odor of rotten eggs.
Sources of hydrogen sulfide include geothermal power plants, petroleum refineries, sewers, and sewage treatment plants. Exposure to hydrogen sulfide can result in nuisance odors, as well as headaches and breathing difficulties at higher concentrations.
Item # 11.
2 – AIR QUALITY
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 2-6
Visibility-Reducing Particles. Visibility-reducing particles are any particles in the air that obstruct the range of visibility. Effects of reduced visibility can include obscuring the viewshed of natural scenery, reducing airport safety, and discouraging tourism. Sources of visibility-reducing particles are the same as for PM2.5.
Reactive Organic Gases. Hydrocarbons are organic gases that are formed from hydrogen and carbon and sometimes other elements. Hydrocarbons that contribute to formation of O3 are referred to and regulated as ROGs or VOCs.
Combustion engine exhaust, oil refineries, and fossil-fueled power plants are the sources of hydrocarbons. Other sources of hydrocarbons include evaporation from petroleum fuels, solvents, dry-cleaning solutions, and paint.
The primary health effects of ROGs result from the formation of O3 and its related health effects. High levels of ROGs in the atmosphere can interfere with oxygen intake by reducing the amount of available oxygen through displacement. Carcinogenic forms of hydrocarbons, such as benzene, are considered TACs. There are no separate ambient air quality standards for ROGs as a group.
2.1.3 Toxic Air Contaminants
A substance is considered toxic if it has the potential to cause adverse health effects in humans, including increasing the risk of cancer upon exposure, or acute and/or chronic noncancer health effects. A toxic substance released into the air is considered a TAC. TACs are identified by federal and state agencies based on a review of available scientific evidence. In the state of California, TACs are identified through a two-step process that was established in 1983 under the Toxic Air Contaminant Identification and Control Act. This two-step process of (1) risk identification and (2) risk management and reduction was designed to protect residents from the health effects of toxic substances in the air. In addition, the California Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Information and Assessment Act, Assembly Bill (AB) 2588, was enacted by the legislature in 1987 to address public concern over the release of TACs into the atmosphere. The law requires facilities emitting toxic substances to provide local air pollution control districts with information that will allow an assessment of the air toxics problem, identification of air toxics emissions sources, location of resulting hotspots, notification of the public exposed to significant risk, and development of effective strategies to reduce potential risks to the public over 5 years.
Examples include certain aromatic and chlorinated hydrocarbons, certain metals, and asbestos. TACs are generated by a number of sources, including stationary sources, such as dry cleaners, gas stations, combustion sources, and laboratories; mobile sources, such as automobiles, including tailpipe emissions, braking, and tire wear; and area sources, such as landfills. Adverse health effects associated with exposure to TACs may include carcinogenic (i.e., cancer-causing) and noncarcinogenic effects. Noncarcinogenic effects typically affect one or more target organ systems and may be experienced on either short-term (acute) or long-term (chronic) exposure to a given TAC.
Diesel Particulate Matter. Diesel particulate matter (DPM) is part of a complex mixture that makes up diesel exhaust. Diesel exhaust is composed of two phases, gas and particle, both of which contribute to health risks. More than 90% of DPM is less than 1 micrometer in diameter (about 1/70 the diameter of a human hair), and thus is a subset of PM2.5 (CARB 2019f). DPM is typically composed of carbon particles (“soot,” also called black carbon) and numerous organic compounds, including over 40 known cancer-causing organic substances. Examples of these chemicals include polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, benzene, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acrolein, and 1,3- butadiene (CARB 2019f). CARB classified “particulate emissions from diesel-fueled engines” (i.e., DPM) (17 CCR 93000) as a TAC in August 1998. DPM is emitted from a broad range of diesel engines: on-road diesel engines, including trucks, buses, and cars, and off-road diesel engines, including locomotives, marine vessels, and heavyPage 288 Item # 11.
2 – AIR QUALITY
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 2-7
duty construction equipment, among others. Approximately 70% of all airborne cancer risk in California is associated with DPM (CARB 2000). To reduce the cancer risk associated with DPM, CARB adopted a diesel risk reduction plan in 2000 (CARB 2000). Because it is part of PM2.5, DPM also contributes to the same noncancer health effects as PM2.5 exposure. These effects include premature death; hospitalizations and emergency department visits for exacerbated chronic heart and lung disease, including asthma; increased respiratory symptoms; and decreased lung function in children. Several studies suggest that exposure to DPM may also facilitate development of new allergies (CARB 2019f). Those most vulnerable to noncancer health effects are children, whose lungs are still developing, and older people, who often have chronic health problems.
2.1.4 Nevada County Attainment Designation
Pursuant to the 1990 federal Clean Air Act amendments, EPA classifies air basins (or portions thereof) as “attainment” or “nonattainment” for each criteria air pollutant, based on whether the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) have been achieved. Generally, if the recorded concentrations of a pollutant are lower than the standard, the area is classified as in attainment for that pollutant. If an area exceeds the standard, the area is classified as in nonattainment for that pollutant. If there are not enough data available to determine whether the standard is exceeded in an area, the area is designated as unclassified or unclassifiable. The designation of unclassifiable/attainment means that the area meets the standard or is expected to be meet the standard despite a lack of monitoring data. Areas that achieve the standards after a nonattainment designation are redesignated as maintenance areas and must have approved Maintenance Plans to ensure continued attainment of the standards. The California Clean Air Act, like its federal counterpart, called for the designation of areas as in attainment or nonattainment, but based on California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) rather than the NAAQS. Table 2-1 depicts the current attainment status of Nevada County with respect to the NAAQS and CAAQS.
Table 2-1. Nevada County Attainment Classification
Pollutant
Designation/Classification
NAAQS CAAQS
Ozone (O3), 1-hour No NAAQS Nonattainment
Ozone (O3), 8-hour Nonattainment–serious Nonattainment
Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) Unclassifiable/attainment Attainment Carbon monoxide (CO) Unclassifiable/attainment Unclassified Sulfur dioxide (SO2) Unclassifiable/attainment Attainment Coarse particulate matter (PM10) Unclassifiable/attainment Nonattainment Fine particulate matter (PM2.5) Unclassifiable/attainment Unclassified Lead Unclassifiable/attainment Attainment
Hydrogen sulfide No NAAQS Unclassified
Sulfates No NAAQS Attainment
Visibility-reducing particles No NAAQS Unclassified
Vinyl chloride No NAAQS No designation
Sources: EPA 2022b (NAAQS); CARB 2022b (CAAQS).
Notes: NAAQS = National Ambient Air Quality Standards; CAAQS = California Ambient Air Quality Standards; bold text = not in attainment; attainment = meets the standards; attainment/maintenance = achieves the standards after a nonattainment designation; nonattainment = does not meet the standards; unclassified or unclassifiable = insufficient data to classify; unclassifiable/attainment = meets the standard or is expected to be meet the standard despite a lack of monitoring data.
Item # 11.
2 – AIR QUALITY
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 2-8
In summary, Nevada County is designated as a nonattainment area for federal and state O3 standards and state PM10 standards. Nevada County is designated as unclassified or in attainment for all other criteria air pollutants.
2.1.5 Local Ambient Air Quality
CARB, air districts, and other agencies monitor ambient air quality at approximately 250 air quality monitoring stations across the state. Air quality monitoring stations usually measure pollutant concentrations 10 feet above ground level; therefore, air quality is often referred to in terms of ground-level concentrations. The most recent background ambient air quality data from 2020 to 2022 within the MCAB are presented in Table 2-2. The closest air quality monitoring station to the Project site is located at 200 Litton Drive, Suite 230, Grass Valley, California, 95945, located approximately 0.75 miles northwest of the Project site. The data collected at this station for O3 and PM2.5 are considered representative of the air quality experienced in the Project vicinity. The closest air quality monitoring stations for NO2 and PM10 is the Placer County station. Air quality data and the number of days exceeding the ambient air quality standards for O3, NO2, PM10, and PM2.5, the pollutants monitored at the Grass Valley and Placer County stations, are provided in Table 2-2.
Table 2-2. Local Ambient Air Quality Data
Averaging
Time Unit
Agency/
Method
Ambient
Air
Quality
Standard
Measured Concentration
by Year Exceedances by Year
2020 2021 2022 2020 2021 2022
Ozone (O3)
Maximum
1-hour
concentration
ppm California 0.12 0.128 0.102 0.275 2 6 1
Maximum
8-hour
concentration
ppm California 0.070 0.123 0.097 0.093 20 40 17
National 0.070 0.122 0.096 0.093 16 38 13
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)
Maximum
1-hour
concentration
ppm California 0.18 0.041 0.046 0.036 0 0 0
National 0.100 0.0411 0.0469 0.036 0 0 0
Annual
concentration
ppm California 0.030 ND 0.006 0.006 — — —
National 0.053 0.006 0.006 0.006 — — —
Coarse Particulate Matter (PM10)
a
Maximum
24-hour
concentration
g/m3 California 50 652.0 116.1 135.8 43.0
(42)
8.0 (9) 25.5
(25)
National 150 722.9 121.4 156.6 14.1
(14)
0.0 (0) 1.0 (1)
Annual
concentration
g/m3 California 20 29.2 19.8 21.2 — — —
Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5)
a
Maximum
24-hour
concentration
g/m3 National 35 202.2 176.4 13.4 ND (27) 16.7
(16)
ND (0)
Annual
concentration
g/m3 California 12 ND 8.7 ND — — —
National 12.0 14.1 8.7 ND — — —
Item # 11.
2 – AIR QUALITY
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 2-9
Sources: CARB 2023a; EPA 2022c.
Notes: ppm = parts per million by volume; — = not available; g/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter; ND = mean does not satisfy minimum data completeness criteria/insufficient data available to determine the value.
Data taken from CARB iADAM (CARB 2023a) and EPA AirData (EPA 2022c) represent the highest concentrations experienced over a given year.
No NO2 values are available for Nevada County because NO2 concentrations are historically low and not commonly monitored, therefore, data was obtained from Placer County.
Exceedances of national and California standards are only shown for O3 and particulate matter. Daily exceedances for particulate matter are estimated days because PM10 and PM2.5 are not monitored daily. All other criteria pollutants did not exceed national or California standards during the years shown. There is no national standard for 1-hour O3, annual PM10, or 24-hour SO2, nor is there a California 24-hour standard for PM2.5.
a Measurements of PM10 and PM2.5 are usually collected every 6 days and every 1 to 3 days, respectively. Number of days exceeding the standards is a mathematical estimate of the number of days concentrations would have been greater than the level of the standard had each day been monitored. The numbers in parentheses are the measured number of samples that exceeded the standard.
2.1.6 Sensitive Receptors
Some land uses are considered more sensitive to changes in air quality than others, depending on the population groups and the activities involved. People most likely to be affected by air pollution include children, the elderly, athletes, and people with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases. Facilities and structures where these air pollution-sensitive people live or spend considerable amounts of time are known as sensitive receptors. Land uses where air pollution-sensitive individuals are most likely to spend time include schools and schoolyards, parks and playgrounds, daycare centers, nursing homes, hospitals, and residential communities (sensitive sites or sensitive land uses) (CARB 2005). To the north and east of the Project site, separated by open space, are the Grass Valley Terrace Apartments. To the north of the Project, on the other side of Dorsey Drive, are the Springhill Garden Apartments. Additionally, across SR 20/49 there are sensitive populations in the Golden Empire Nursing and Rehab Center and the Sierra Nevada Memorial Hospital. In addition to the existing proximate sensitive receptors described previously, the Project would also introduce new sensitive residential receptors.
2.2 Regulatory Framework
2.2.1 Federal Regulations
Criteria Air Pollutants
The federal Clean Air Act, passed in 1970 and last amended in 1990, forms the basis for the national air pollution control effort. EPA is responsible for implementing most aspects of the Clean Air Act, including setting NAAQS for major air pollutants; setting hazardous air pollutant (HAP) standards; approving state attainment plans; setting motor vehicle emission standards; issuing stationary source emission standards and permits; and establishing acid rain control measures, stratospheric O3 protection measures, and enforcement provisions. Under the Clean Air Act, NAAQS are established for the following criteria pollutants: O3, CO, NO2, SO2, PM10, PM2.5, and lead.
The NAAQS describe acceptable air quality conditions designed to protect the health and welfare of the citizens of the nation. The NAAQS (other than for O3, NO2, SO2, PM10, PM2.5, and those based on annual averages or arithmetic mean) are not to be exceeded more than once per year. NAAQS for O3, NO2, SO2, PM10, and PM2.5 are based on statistical calculations over 1- to 3-year periods, depending on the pollutant. The Clean Air Act requires EPA to reassess the NAAQS at least every 5 years to determine whether adopted standards are adequate to protect public
Item # 11.
2 – AIR QUALITY
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 2-10
health based on current scientific evidence. States with areas that exceed the NAAQS must prepare a state implementation plan that demonstrates how those areas will attain the standards within mandated time frames.
Hazardous Air Pollutants
The 1977 federal Clean Air Act amendments required EPA to identify national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants to protect public health and welfare. HAPs include certain VOCs, pesticides, herbicides, and radionuclides that present a tangible hazard, based on scientific studies of exposure to humans and other mammals. Under the 1990 federal Clean Air Act Amendments, which expanded the control program for HAPs, 189 substances and chemical families were identified as HAPs.
2.2.2 State Regulations
The federal Clean Air Act delegates the regulation of air pollution control and the enforcement of the NAAQS to the states. In California, the task of air quality management and regulation has been legislatively granted to CARB, with subsidiary responsibilities assigned to air quality management districts and air pollution control districts at the regional and county levels. CARB, which became part of the California Environmental Protection Agency in 1991, is responsible for ensuring implementation of the California Clean Air Act of 1988, responding to the federal Clean Air Act, and regulating emissions from motor vehicles and consumer products.
CARB has established CAAQS, which are generally more restrictive than the NAAQS. The CAAQS describe adverse conditions; that is, pollution levels must be below these standards before a basin can attain the standard. Air quality is considered in attainment if pollutant levels are continuously below the CAAQS and violate the standards no more than once each year. The CAAQS for O3, CO, SO2 (1-hour and 24-hour), NO2, PM10, PM2.5, and visibility-reducing particles are values that are not to be exceeded. All others are not to be equaled or exceeded. The NAAQS and CAAQS are presented in Table 2-3.
Table 2-3. Ambient Air Quality Standards
Pollutant Averaging Time
CAAQSa NAAQSb
Concentrationc Primaryc,d Secondaryc,e
O3 1 hour 0.09 ppm
(180 g/m3)
— Same as primary
standardf
8 hours 0.070 ppm
(137 g/m3)
0.070 ppm
(137 g/m3)
f
NO2
g 1 hour 0.18 ppm
(339 g/m3)
0.100 ppm
(188 g/m3)
Same as primary
standard
Annual arithmetic
mean
0.030 ppm
(57 g/m3)
0.053 ppm
(100 g/m3)
CO 1 hour 20 ppm
(23 mg/m3)
35 ppm (40 mg/m3) None
8 hours 9.0 ppm
(10 mg/m3)
9 ppm
(10 mg/m3)
SO2
h 1 hour 0.25 ppm
(655 g/m3)
0.075 ppm
(196 g/m3)
—
Item # 11.
2 – AIR QUALITY
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 2-11
Table 2-3. Ambient Air Quality Standards
Pollutant Averaging Time
CAAQSa NAAQSb
Concentrationc Primaryc,d Secondaryc,e
3 hours — — 0.5 ppm (1,300
g/m3)
24 hours 0.04 ppm
(105 g/m3)
0.14 ppm
(for certain areas)g
—
Annual — 0.030 ppm
(for certain areas)g
—
PM10i 24 hours 50 g/m3 150 g/m3 Same as primary
standard Annual arithmetic
mean
20 g/m3 —
PM2.5i 24 hours — 35 g/m3 Same as primary
standard
Annual arithmetic
mean
12 g/m3 12.0 g/m3 15.0 g/m3
Leadj,k 30-day average 1.5 g/m3 — —
Calendar quarter — 1.5 g/m3
(for certain areas)k
Same as primary
standard
Rolling 3-month
average
— 0.15 g/m3
Hydrogen
sulfide
1 hour 0.03 ppm
(42 µg/m3)
— —
Vinyl
chloridej
24 hours 0.01 ppm
(26 µg/m3)
— —
Sulfates 24 hours 25 µg/m3 — —
Visibility
reducing
particles
8 hours (10:00
a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
PST)
Insufficient amount to
produce an extinction
coefficient of 0.23 per
kilometer due to the
number of particles
when the relative
humidity is less than
70%
— —
Source: CARB 2016.
Notes: CAAQS = California Ambient Air Quality Standards; NAAQS = National Ambient Air Quality Standards; O3 = ozone; ppm = parts per million by volume; g/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter; NO2 = nitrogen dioxide; CO = carbon monoxide; mg/m3= milligrams per cubic meter; SO2 = sulfur dioxide; PM10 = coarse particulate matter; PM2.5 = fine particulate matter; PST = Pacific Standard Time.
a CAAQS for O3, CO, SO2 (1-hour and 24-hour), NO2, suspended particulate matter (PM10, PM2.5), and visibility-reducing particles are values that are not to be exceeded. All others are not to be equaled or exceeded. CAAQS are listed in the Table of Standards in Section 70200 of Title 17 of the California Code of Regulations. b NAAQS (other than O3, NO2, SO2, particulate matter, and those based on annual averages or annual arithmetic mean) are not to be exceeded more than once per year. The O3 standard is attained when the fourth highest 8-hour concentration measured at each site in a year, averaged over 3 years, is equal to or less than the standard. For PM10, the 24-hour standard is attained when the expected number of days per calendar year with a 24-hour average concentration above 150 µg/m3 is equal to or less than
1. For PM2.5, the 24-hour standard is attained when 98% of the daily concentrations, averaged over 3 years, are equal to or less than the standard.
c Concentration expressed first in units in which it was promulgated. Equivalent units given in parentheses are based on a reference temperature of 25°C and a reference pressure of 760 torr. Most measurements of air quality are to be corrected to a reference
Item # 11.
2 – AIR QUALITY
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 2-12
temperature of 25°C and a reference pressure of 760 torr; ppm in this table refers to ppm by volume, or micromoles of pollutant per mole of gas.
d National primary standards: The levels of air quality necessary, with an adequate margin of safety, to protect the public health. e National secondary standards: The levels of air quality necessary to protect the public welfare from any known or anticipated adverse effects of a pollutant.
f On October 1, 2015, the national 8-hour O3 primary and secondary standards were lowered from 0.075 to 0.070 ppm. g To attain the national 1-hour standard, the 3-year average of the annual 98th percentile of the 1-hour daily maximum concentrations at each site must not exceed 100 parts per billion (ppb). Note that the national 1-hour standard is in units of ppb. California standards are in units of ppm. To directly compare the national 1-hour standard to the California standards, the units can be converted from ppb to ppm. In this case, the national standard of 100 ppb is identical to 0.100 ppm. h On June 2, 2010, a new 1-hour SO2 standard was established, and the existing 24-hour and annual primary standards were revoked.
To attain the national 1-hour standard, the 3-year average of the annual 99th percentile of the 1-hour daily maximum concentrations at each site must not exceed 75 ppb. The 1971 SO2 national standards (24-hour and annual) remain in effect until 1 year after an area is designated for the 2010 standard, except that in areas designated nonattainment of the 1971 standards, the 1971 standards remain in effect until implementation plans to attain or maintain the 2010 standards are approved. i On December 14, 2012, the national annual PM2.5 primary standard was lowered from 15 g/m3 to 12.0 g/m3. The existing national 24-hour PM2.5 standards (primary and secondary) were retained at 35 g/m3, as was the annual secondary standard of 15 μg/m3.
The existing 24-hour PM10 standards (primary and secondary) of 150 g/m3 were also retained. The form of the annual primary and secondary standards is the annual mean averaged over 3 years. j CARB has identified lead and vinyl chloride as TACs with no threshold level of exposure for adverse health effects determined. These actions allow for the implementation of control measures at levels below the ambient concentrations specified for these pollutants. k The national standard for lead was revised on October 15, 2008, to a rolling 3-month average. The 1978 lead standard (1.5 μg/m3 as a quarterly average) remains in effect until 1 year after an area is designated for the 2008 standard, except that in areas designated nonattainment for the 1978 standard, the 1978 standard remains in effect until implementation plans to attain or maintain the 2008 standard are approved.
Toxic Air Contaminants
The state Air Toxics Program was established in 1983 under AB 1807 (Tanner). The California TAC list identifies more than 700 pollutants, for a subset of which carcinogenic and noncarcinogenic toxicity criteria have been established pursuant to the California Health and Safety Code. In accordance with AB 2728, the state list includes the (federal) HAPs. In 1987, the California State Legislature (Legislature) enacted the Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Information and Assessment Act of 1987 (AB 2588) to address public concern over the release of TACs into the atmosphere. AB 2588 requires facilities emitting toxic substances to provide local air pollution control districts with information that will allow an assessment of the air toxics problem, identification of air toxics emissions sources, location of resulting hotspots, notification of the public exposed to significant risk, and development of effective strategies to reduce potential risks to the public over 5 years. TAC emissions from individual facilities are quantified and prioritized. High-priority facilities are required to perform a health risk assessment (HRA), and if specific thresholds are exceeded, the facility operator is required to communicate the results to the public in the form of notices and public meetings.
As described previously, in 2000, CARB approved a comprehensive diesel risk reduction plan to reduce diesel emissions from both new and existing diesel-fueled vehicles and engines, which was anticipated to result in an 80% decrease in statewide diesel health risk in 2020 compared with the diesel risk in 2000. Additional regulations apply to new trucks and diesel fuel, including the On-Road Heavy Duty Diesel Vehicle (In-Use) Regulation, the On-Road Heavy Duty (New) Vehicle Program, the In-Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicle Regulation, and the New Off-Road Compression-Ignition (Diesel) Engines and Equipment Program. These regulations and programs have timetables by which manufacturers must comply and existing operators must upgrade their diesel-powered equipment. There are several Airborne Toxic Control Measures that reduce diesel emissions, including In-Use Off-Road Diesel-Fueled Fleets (13 CCR 2449 et seq.) and In-Use On-Road Diesel-Fueled Vehicles (13 CCR 2025).
Item # 11.
2 – AIR QUALITY
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 2-13
California Health and Safety Code Section 41700
This section of the Health and Safety Code states that a person shall not discharge from any source whatsoever quantities of air contaminants or other material that cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public; or that endanger the comfort, repose, health, or safety of any of those persons or the public; or that cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property. This section also applies to sources of objectionable odors.
CARB Land Use Handbook
CARB is the state agency with jurisdiction over and expertise in issues relating to air quality and public health. CARB provides guidance that helps inform local agencies in establishing local guidance, thresholds, standards, and methodologies for assessing potential air quality and related human health effects. In 2005, CARB released an informational guide entitled, CARB Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective (2005; hereafter referred to as the CARB Handbook, which is provided as Appendix N to this SFEIR). The purpose of this guide is to provide information to aid local jurisdictions in addressing issues and concerns related to the siting of sensitive land uses near major sources of air pollution, including freeways and high traffic roadways. The CARB Handbook is an industry-standard reference guide for considering the potential for exposure to TACs from roadways.
It includes recommended separation distances for various land uses, which are summarized in Table 2-4. These recommendations were based on studies suggesting that health risks to sensitive receptors associated with mobile sources, particularly DPM, are highest within 300 feet of a major freeway, and that a 70% reduction in ambient particulate levels occurs at 500 feet from the source (Appendix N).
The CARB Handbook currently recommends that new sensitive land uses not be located within 500 feet of a freeway, urban roadways with 100,000 vehicles per day, or rural roads with 50,000 vehicles per day. However, these recommendations are not site-specific and should not be interpreted as defined “buffer zones.” The recommendations of the CARB Handbook are advisory and need to be balanced with other state and local policies (Appendix N). As previously discussed, the nearest major roadway in relation to the Project site is SR 20/49, which is located north of the Project site, with some residences located within 170 feet of SR 20/49. Table 9-5 of the 2019 EIR presents traffic volume of 41,000 ADT and a cumulative 2035 traffic volume of 56,000. As discussed in Section 2.4.1, however, based on more recent estimates obtained from the Caltrans, the adjacent segments of SR 20/49 currently average only approximately 30,928 ADT (Caltrans 2023). Although the current SR 20/49 traffic volumes would be less than the 50,000 ADT threshold established by the CARB Handbook, this SFEIR evaluates the potential health risks associated with traffic on SR 20/49, with and without the Project as required by the Court of Appeal Opinion and Nevada County Superior Court Ruling. The SFEIR considers Project effects on both an “existing conditions” baseline and a 2035 cumulative baseline, as directed by those courts.
Table 2-4. Recommendations on Siting New Sensitive Land Uses Near Air Pollutant Sources
Source Category Advisory Recommendations
Freeways and High Traffic Roads Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 500 feet of a freeway, urban roads with 100,000 vehicles per day, or
rural roads with 50,000 vehicles per day.
Item # 11.
2 – AIR QUALITY
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 2-14
Table 2-4. Recommendations on Siting New Sensitive Land Uses Near Air Pollutant Sources
Source Category Advisory Recommendations
Distribution Centers Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 1,000 feet of a distribution center (that accommodates more than 100
trucks per day, more than 40 trucks with operating
transport refrigeration units (TRUs) per day, or where TRU unit operations exceed 300 hours per week).
Take into account the configuration of existing
distribution centers and avoid locating residences and
other new sensitive land uses near entry and exit points.
Rail Yards Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 1,000 feet of a major service and maintenance rail yard.
Within one mile of a rail yard, consider possible siting limitations and mitigation approaches.
Ports Avoid siting of new sensitive land uses immediately downwind of ports in the most heavily impacted zones.
Consult local air districts or CARB on the status of
pending analyses of health risks.
Refineries Avoid siting new sensitive land uses immediately downwind of petroleum refineries. Consult with local air districts and other local agencies to determine an
appropriate separation.
Chrome Platers Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 1,000 feet of a chrome plater.
Dry Cleaners Using Perchloroethylene Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 300 feet of any dry-cleaning operation. For operations with two or
more machines, provide 500 feet. For operations with
three or more machines, consult with the local air
district.
Do not site new sensitive land uses in the same building with perchloroethylene dry cleaning operations.
Gasoline Dispensing Facilities Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 300 feet of a large gas station (defined as a facility with a throughput of 3.6 million gallons per year or greater). A 50-foot
separation is recommended for typical gas-dispensing
facilities.
Source: Appendix N.
2.2.3 Local Regulations
Northern Sierra Air Quality Management District
The NSAQMD is the primary agency responsible for planning to meet federal and state ambient air quality standards in Nevada, Plumas, and Sierra counties. The NSAQMD develops rules and regulations for stationary sources and equipment, prepares emissions inventories and air quality management planning documents, and conducts source testing and inspections. NSAQMD rules and regulations applicable to the Project include the following:
Item # 11.
2 – AIR QUALITY
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 2-15
Rule 205 Nuisance: This rule prohibits discharge of air contaminants or other material from any source which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons, or to the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health, or safety of any such persons, or the public, or which cause to have natural tendency to cause injury or damage to business or property.
Rule 207 Particulate Matter: This rule prohibits the release or discharge of particulate matter emissions in excess of 0.1 grains per cubic foot of dry exhaust gas as standards conditions into the atmosphere from any source or single processing unit, exclusive of sources emitting combustion contaminants only.
Rule 226 Dust Control: This rule requires the submittal of a Dust Control Plan to the NSAQMD for approval prior to any surface disturbance, including clearing of vegetation.
Rule 227 Cutback and Emulsified Asphalt Paving Materials: This rule restricts the discharge of VOCs caused by the use or manufacture of Cutback or Emulsified asphalts for paving, road construction or road maintenance, unless such manufacture or use complies with the provisions of the rule.
Rule 904 Asbestos Airborne Toxic Control Measure Asbestos-Containing-Serpentine: This rule incorporates by reference Title 17, Section 93106, of the California Code of Regulations in its entirety.
Grass Valley General Plan
The Land Use (LU) element, Circulation (C) element, and Conservation and Open Space (COS) element contain goals (G), objectives (O), policies (P) and implementation measures (I) to reduce emissions and improve air quality. Most of these goals, objectives, policies and implementation measures focus on promoting infill development, mixed use developments, and alternative means of transportation to reduce the number of vehicles on the road and the distance required to access goods and services. The following goals, objectives, policies, and implementation measures are applicable to the Project:
2-LUG: Promote infill as an alternative to peripheral expansion where feasible. 3-LUG: In areas of new development, plan for diversity of land uses and housing types, including mixed use developments.
6-LUG: Promote a jobs/housing balance within the Grass Valley region in order to facilitate pleasant, convenient and enjoyable working conditions for residents, including opportunities for short home to work journeys. 4-LUO: Reduction in environmental impacts associated with peripheral growth. 15-LUO: Reduction in the number of vehicle miles driven. 5-LUP: Actively market infill and available parcels during contracts with developers and community members.
6-LUP: Develop a more specific development strategy for identified infill parcels following General Plan adoption.
7-LUP: Utilize California Redevelopment Law to provide incentives to infill development.
8-LUP: Encourage and facilitate mixed-use developments on infill sites. 9-LUP: Provide for higher residential densities on infill site and in the Downtown area.
Item # 11.
2 – AIR QUALITY
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 2-16
23-LUP: Encourage mixed use developments incorporating a variety of densities on infill sites and in areas proposed for annexation.
1-CG: Provide a circulation system that utilizes a variety of transportation modes, including alternative means of transportation.
2-CG: Ensure that streets and roadway improvements complement and support land use goals, objectives, policies, and plans.
5-CO: Convenient, safe and functional facilities for pedestrians, bicyclists and equestrians. 6-CP: Locate transit stops and park and ride facilities near freeway interchanges and in conjunction with higher density residential and mixed-use developments. 8-CP: Incorporate separated, non-motorized paths in street cross-section designs whenever feasible.
6-COSG: Assure compliance with and understanding of air and water quality regulations and standards. 16-COSO: Inclusion of air and water quality considerations in land use decisions rendered by the Planning Commission and City Council.
22-COSP: Implement circulation/transportation measures designed to reduce reliance on the automobile.
2.3 Significance Criteria and Methodology
2.3.1 Thresholds of Significance
With respect to potential adverse health effects due to exposure to mobile source air pollutants, the significance threshold used to evaluate this impact is derived from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. Under this threshold, a significant impact would occur if the Project would:
Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.
Project-related impacts under this threshold were determined to be less than significant in the 2019 EIR. However, as previously discussed, this SFEIR includes an additional evaluation of health risk impacts from mobile source emissions at new residences, visitors, and employees at the commercial uses proposed by the Project. In addition, health risks associated with existing sensitive receptors within 1,000 feet of SR 20/49 was also assessed.
Notably, in California Building Industry Association v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District (2015) 62 Cal.4th 369, 377 (“CBIA”), the California Supreme Court held that “agencies subject to CEQA generally are not required to analyze the impact of existing environmental conditions on a project’s future users or residents” (italics added).
The court did not hold, however, that CEQA never requires consideration of the effects of existing environmental conditions on the future occupants or users of a project. But the circumstances in which such conditions may be considered are narrow: “when a proposed project risks exacerbating those environmental hazards or conditions that already exist, an agency must analyze the potential impact of such hazards on future residents or users. In those specific instances, it is the project’s impact on the environment—and not the environment's impact on the project—that compels an evaluation of how future residents or users could be affected by exacerbated conditions.”
Item # 11.
2 – AIR QUALITY
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 2-17
(Id. at pp. 377-378, italics added.) Furthermore, as stated by the Court of Appeal on remand following the Supreme Court’s decision in CBIA, a lead agency may rely on BAAQMD’s receptor thresholds to analyze the impact of the project on the environment, including a project’s potential to exacerbate existing conditions. (See California Building Industry Assn. v. Bay Area Air Quality Management Dist. (2016) 2 Cal.App.5th 1067, 1082-1084.) Consistent with this authority and the decision of the Court of Appeal, the City has chosen to apply the BAAQMD project-level significance thresholds in the HRA, as discussed below.
Accordingly, based on direction from the Court of Appeal, the Nevada County Superior Court found that because the Project would increase traffic volumes on SR 20/49, the Project could exacerbate health risks for future Project residents and occupants associated with SR 20/49 as a contributor of mobile source emissions and that the 2019 EIR did not adequately evaluate this potential effect (Appendix M).
As stated previously, in order to evaluate health risks associated with the proposed scenarios (baseline, baseline + Project, cumulative 2035, and cumulative 2035 + Project), the BAAQMD thresholds were used as the NSAQMD has not established an equivalent approach, particularly for increased PM2.5 concentrations. The most recent BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines were adopted in April 2023 and include guidelines for the project analysis and thresholds for criteria air pollutants, TACs, and GHG emissions (BAAQMD 2023). Health effects from carcinogenic air toxics are usually described in terms of cancer risk. The BAAQMD recommends an incremental cancer risk threshold of 10 in 1 million.
For context, the National Cancer Institute estimates that approximately 39.5% of people will be diagnosed with cancer during their lifetimes (National Cancer Institute 2020). A cancer risk of 10 in a million indicates that a person has an additional risk of 10 chances in a million (0.001%) of developing cancer during their lifetime as a result of the air pollution scenario being evaluated, which is minimal and defined as the “No Significant Risk Level” for carcinogens in Proposition 65. In addition, some TACs have noncarcinogenic effects. The BAAQMD recommends a Hazard Index of 1 or more for acute (short-term) and chronic (long-term) effects.3 BAAQMD significance thresholds applied for the HRA assessment are summarized in Table 2-5.
Table 2-5. BAAQMD Thresholds of Significance
Factor CEQA Threshold
Risks and hazards (individual project) Compliance with qualified community risk reduction plan, or:
Increased cancer risk of >10.0 in a million
Increased noncancer risk of >1.0 Hazard Index
(chronic or acute)
Ambient PM2.5 increase >0.3 μg/m3 annual average
Source: BAAQMD 2023.
Notes: BAAQMD = Bay Area Air Quality Management District; CEQA = California Environmental Quality Act; PM2.5 = fine particulate matter; g/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter.
3 Non-cancer adverse health risks are measured against a hazard index, which is defined as the ratio of the predicted incremental exposure concentrations of the various noncarcinogens from the Project to published reference exposure levels that can cause adverse health effects.
Item # 11.
2 – AIR QUALITY
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 2-18
2.3.2 Approach and Methodology
Roadway Health Risk Assessment
As previously discussed, the Project is located adjacent to SR 20/49, which currently has approximately 30,000 average daily traffic (Caltrans 2023). As such, four roadway HRA scenarios are analyzed: baseline, baseline + Project, cumulative 2035, and cumulative 2035 + Project, in order to estimate the change between the baseline and cumulative scenarios with and without the Project-generated vehicle travel.
The baseline and baseline + Project scenarios applied an operational year of 2022, which is consistent with the most recent Caltrans data available. The cumulative 2035 and cumulative 2035 + Project scenarios applied an operational year of 2035. These operational years were assumed as the starting year for the HRA’s 30-year exposure for residents, visitors, and employees, on the project site and within 1,000 feet of SR 20/49. Notably, assuming an earlier year results in a more conservative analysis as vehicle emission factors and the percent of diesel vehicles on the roadway generally decreases over time due to more stringent vehicle standards, as well as fleet turnover replacing older vehicles in later years.
The SR 20/49 traffic volumes provided by Caltrans were collected at Dorsey Drive. The annual vehicle miles traveled (VMT) for the northbound and southbound portions of SR 20/49 was calculated based on the segment length and traffic count volumes. To account for changes in vehicle volumes, 2022 Caltrans Performance Measurement System (PeMS) data (January 1, 2021, to December 31, 2022) was obtained to estimate the annual growth on each segment, northbound and southbound separately, between 2021 and 2022. Based on the 2022 PeMS data, annual traffic volume on SR 20/49 was estimated to decline. Therefore, the estimated annual growth of 0.5% was conservatively assumed instead of a negative growth rate. The existing traffic volume, as provided by Caltrans, on SR 20/49, which was incorporated into the HRA, was 30,928 ADT. Furthermore, the baseline + Project scenario SR 20/49 traffic volume was estimated to be 39,801 ADT, the cumulative 2035 scenario traffic volume was estimated to be 33,093 ADT, and the cumulative 2035 + Project scenario traffic volume was estimated to be 40,619 ADT. The ADTs for each of these scenarios represents a worst-case scenario in which it was assumed that all the Project’s ADT would travel on SR 20/49. The HRA assessment also estimated the potential health risks associated with a 20% trip distribution on SR 20/49, which is consistent with the 2019 transportation assessment. Assuming a 20% trip distribution on SR 20/49 resulted an estimated 32,703 ADT for the baseline + Project scenario and 34,868 ADT for the cumulative 2035 + Project scenario.
Notably, the existing and cumulative conditions of SR 20/49 presented in Table 9-5 of the 2019 EIR reflected higher ADT than are currently projected; the volumes in the 2019 EIR were based on the Caltrans ADT projections developed in 2016. Specifically, the 2019 EIR assumed traffic volumes of 41,000 ADT for the baseline scenario, 42,000 ADT for the baseline + Project scenario, 56,000 ADT for the cumulative 2035 scenario, and 57,000 ADT for the cumulative 2035 + Project scenario. As noted in Table 2-4, the CARB Handbook defines a High Traffic Roadway as one that carries at least 50,000 ADT in rural settings (Appendix N). Based on the 2016 ADT projections, SR 20/49 would have met this standard for the cumulative condition. However, this SFEIR and the associated HRA are based on the most recent Caltrans data from 2021 and 2022 because the 2021 and 2022 traffic volume data represent the most current traffic conditions. Overall, current traffic volumes on SR 20/49 are substantially less than what was assumed in the 2019 EIR. Thus, based on the best available data and using the threshold adopted by the City and upheld by the Court of Appeal, SR 20/49 is no longer projected to meet the CARB Handbook definition of a High Traffic Roadway. Despite this change in projected ADT and its relation to the CARB Handbook threshold, however, the City, based on the direction of the Court of Appeal and the trial court’s Ruling, is treating SR 20/49 as a pollution source and analyzing the associated health risk.
Item # 11.
2 – AIR QUALITY
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 2-19
Per the BAAQMD guidance, the TACs included in this HRA are DPM and total organic gases (TOG, both exhaust and evaporative) from on-road vehicles (cars and trucks) traveling on SR 20/49. For risk assessment purposes, particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to 10 microns (PM10) in diesel exhaust originating from diesel vehicles traveling on SR 20/49 is considered DPM (BAAQMD 2023). As explained previously, diesel exhaust, which is a complex mixture of gases and fine particles emitted by diesel-fueled combustion engines, is identified by the State of California as a known carcinogen. Under California regulatory guidelines, DPM is used as a surrogate measure of carcinogen exposure for the mixture of chemicals that make up diesel exhaust as a whole.
Although TACs in brake and tire wear dust were also topics of concern in public comment, neither were evaluated herein. While brakes and tires may include toxic components that may become airborne during vehicle travel, the speciation of potential toxics within particulate matter generated by brake and tire wear is highly speculative given current science and methods. Until additional research is conducted and HRA guidance is developed, non-exhaust vehicle emission sources cannot be accurately and meaningfully evaluated separately from vehicle exhaust sources. However, PM2.5 concentrations were included in the evaluation, which account for brake and tire wear fine particulate dust.
The Project would be required to comply with the Building Code applicable when construction permit applications are submitted (the 2022 Building Code went into effect on January 1, 2023). In general, later building codes are more stringent than earlier building codes with respect to the protection of occupants from outdoor air pollution.
The Building Code requires installation of Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value 13 (MERV 13) air filtration systems on return vents in the proposed residential units. EPA reported that the MERV 13 filters remove 80% to 90% of particles ranging from 1 to 10 microns (EPA 2020). To account for exposure of DPM PM2.5 inside and outside the buildings, the emissions at the new residential units to be developed under the Project incorporated an 87% time spent inside factor,4 which accounts for the amount of time that particulate exposure would be reduced by the MERV 13 filters. MERV 13 filters were not assumed for existing uses since these filters are not common in buildings constructed prior to January 2023. This HRA also incorporates the time spent away from home as recommended by OEHHA (OEHHA 2015). Accounting for the actual time spent indoors and exposure related to the residents within the Project provides a more realistic exposure scenario from particulate emissions from SR 20/49. Detailed emissions data are provided in Appendix O.
Per the BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines (BAAQMD 2023), the TACs included in this HRA are DPM and total organic gases (TOG, both exhaust and evaporative) from on-road vehicles (cars and trucks). DPM and TOG emission factors were calculated using the latest version of CARB’s mobile source emission inventory, EMFAC2021.
Speciation profiles for TOG was then used to determine the emissions of gaseous TACs (BAAQMD 2023). To estimate the emissions from vehicles traveling on SR 20/49, EMFAC2021 was run for all vehicle classes in Nevada County. EMFAC2021 can generate emission factors (also referred to as emission rates) in grams per mile for the fleet in a class of motor vehicles within a region for a particular geographical study year. For this analysis, Nevada County and calendar years 2022 and 2035 were selected for the existing and the cumulative scenarios. Of the total ADT for each of the modeled scenarios, approximately 12% was assumed to be trucks and the remaining were assumed to be non-trucks (all other vehicle types including passenger vehicles, buses, motorcycles, etc.), which was based on the fleet mix (percentage of vehicles by class) contained in the EMFAC2021 model. For trucks and non-trucks on SR 20/49, the proportion of diesel and gasoline fueled vehicles was also estimated based on data from CARB’s EMFAC2021 model for the overall vehicle fleet for Nevada County. 4 Based on a study conducted by CARB and University of California, Berkeley, Activity Patterns of California Residents (CARB 1991).
Item # 11.
2 – AIR QUALITY
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 2-20
A VMT weighted average emission factor was estimated for trucks (light-heavy duty truck, light-heavy duty truck 2, medium-heavy duty truck, and heavy-heavy duty truck) and non-trucks, which includes all other vehicle types, (lightduty automobiles, light-duty truck class 1, light-duty truck class 2, medium-duty vehicle, motorhome, other bus, school bus, urban bus, and motorcycle). The amount of vehicle traffic present on the roadway segments evaluated in this HRA is measured in terms of VMT per segment. This was calculated by taking the average daily traffic and multiplying it by the distance of the roadway segment evaluated. The total emissions of DPM and TOG (in pounds per hour and pounds per year) were then calculated for each roadway segment by multiplying the emission factor and the VMT. Notably, in addition to exhaust PM10 (which is used as a surrogate for DPM), non-TAC PM2.5 emissions associated with tire-wear and brake-wear and resuspended road dust were included in the emissions inventory to estimate total PM2.5 concentrations. The calculated emissions of DPM, TOG, and PM2.5 are depicted in Appendix O.
Air dispersion models calculate the atmospheric transport and fate of pollutants from the emission source. The models calculate the concentration of selected pollutants at specific downwind ground-level points, such as residential or school receptors. The transformation (fate) of an airborne pollutant, its movement with the prevailing winds (transport), its crosswind and vertical movement due to atmospheric turbulence (dispersion), and its removal due to dry and wet deposition are influenced by the pollutant’s physical and chemical properties and by meteorological and environmental conditions. Factors such as distance from the source to the receptor, meteorological conditions, intervening land use and terrain, pollutant release characteristics, and background pollutant concentrations affect the predicted air concentration of an air pollutant. Air dispersion models have the capability to take all of these factors into consideration when calculating downwind ground-level pollutant concentrations.
Dudek conducted a dispersion modeling analysis of DPM, TOG, and PM2.5 emitted from vehicles traveling on SR 20/49 proximate to the project site for the HRA. The dispersion modeling was performed using AERMOD Version 21112, which is the model EPA approved and BAAQMD recommends for atmospheric dispersion of emissions.
AERMOD is a steady-state Gaussian plume model that incorporates air dispersion based on planetary boundary layer turbulence structure and scaling concepts, including treatment of surface and elevated sources, building downwash, and simple and complex terrain.
Principal parameters of AERMOD for the Project operations included the following:
Dispersion Model: The air dispersion model used was AERMOD, Version 21112, with the Lakes Environmental Software implementation/user interface, AERMOD View, Version 10.2.1. A unit emission rate (1 gram per second (g/s)) was normalized over the line of adjacent volume sources and area sources for the AERMOD run to obtain the “Χ/Q” values. Χ/Q is a dispersion factor that is the average effluent concentration normalized by source strength, and is used as a way to simplify the representation of emissions from many sources. The maximum concentrations were determined for the 1-hour and Period averaging periods. Meteorological Data: The most recent available 5-year meteorological data (years 2014-2016, 2018 and 2019) for the Blue Canyon - Nyack Airport station (KBLU) was downloaded from CARB, and then input to AERMOD.
Urban and Rural Options: Typically, urban areas have more surface roughness and structures and lowalbedo surfaces that absorb more sunlight, and thus, more heat, relative to rural areas. The urban dispersion option was selected and the Nevada County population for year 2022 (102,293 persons) input into AERMOD.
Item # 11.
2 – AIR QUALITY
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 2-21
Terrain Characteristics: Digital elevation model files were imported into AERMOD so that complex terrain features were evaluated as appropriate. The National Elevation Dataset (NED) dataset with resolution of 1/3 arc-second was used.
Sensitive Receptors: This HRA evaluates the risk to existing residential receptors located in proximity to the Project. A uniform fine 1-kilometer by 1-kilometer Cartesian grid with 20-meter spacing was centered over the project site and converted into discrete receptors to capture the maximum risk. Source Release Scenario: Vehicles traveling on SR 20/49 were modeled as a line of adjacent volume sources for the roadway segment nearby the project site. The length of each line volume source was based on the modeled length in AERMOD. The AERMOD-modeled roadway segments total up to 1,884 meters.
Trucks and non-trucks were modeled as separate line volume sources to account for different plume and release characteristics resulting in a total of eight separate line volume sources. Plume height was assumed to be 6.1 meters for trucks and 0.91 meters for non-trucks. A release height was estimated for each source assuming 1/2 of the plume height, which equals 3.05 meters for trucks and 0.46 meters for non-trucks.
The plume width was estimated for each segment based on the width of the traveling lanes plus 6 meters (or approximately 3 meters on each side) to account for vehicle wake (EPA 2021).
Dispersion model plot files from AERMOD were then imported into CARB’s HARP2 to determine health risk, which requires peak one-hour emission rates and annual emission rates for all pollutants for each modeling source.
OEHHA recommends that an exposure duration (residency time) of 30 years be used to estimate individual cancer risk for the maximally exposed individual receptor (MEIR) starting in the third trimester of pregnancy to accommodate the increased susceptibility of exposures in early life (OEHHA 2015).
2.3.3 Modeling Uncertainties
Dispersion Modeling
Source parameters used in the AERMOD emissions modeling add uncertainty to the analysis. For all emission sources, Dudek used source parameters that are recommended as defaults by the EPA (EPA 2021) or the BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines (released April 2023), which are expected to produce more conservative (i.e., overestimation of) results. Although differences may exist between the actual emissions characteristics of a source and its representation in the modeling, exposure concentrations used in this HRA represent approximate exposure concentrations. Furthermore, the analysis of cumulative 2035 conditions does not include yet-to-be realized emissions reductions from future regulations for trucks and passenger vehicles and based on the negative growth rate reflected in Caltrans traffic data. Instead, this analysis conservatively assumes a 0.5% growth rate of traffic volumes on SR 20/49.
Exposure Concentrations
When estimating pollutant exposures using the AERMOD dispersion mode, there is uncertainty embodied in the modeling. AERMOD’s limitations provide a source of uncertainty in the estimation of exposure concentrations.
According to the EPA, errors of 10 to 40% are typical for the highest estimated concentrations due to the limitation of the AERMOD algorithms (EPA 2017). The methods employed by Dudek consistently produce conservative results, and therefore estimated exposure concentrations are likely to be at or above actual exposure concentrations.
Item # 11.
2 – AIR QUALITY
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 2-22
Exposure Assumptions
A number of assumptions must be made in order to estimate human exposure to chemicals. These assumptions include parameters such as breathing rates, exposure time and frequency, exposure duration, and human activity patterns. Although the best way to estimate the weighted arithmetic mean, is to use average values derived from scientifically defensible studies, many of the exposure variables used in this HRA per the 2015 OEHHA guidelines and BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines are high end (i.e., more conservative) estimates. For example, although the OEHHA guidance recommends assuming a period of time spent out of the home each day for residential sensitive receptors, this analysis conservatively assumes that children are exposed 24 hours per day, and assumes adult residents are home 73% of the time. These assumptions are conservative, since most residents do not remain in their homes for these periods of time throughout the year. This analysis follows OEHHA and BAAQMD guidance in evaluating outdoor air; however, indoor air concentrations may be different due to filtration or other reductions resulting from the building shell or heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems. The combination of several high-end and conservative estimates used as exposure parameters may substantially overestimate chemical intake. The excess lifetime cancer risks calculated in this HRA are therefore likely to be overestimated.
Toxicity Assessment
The standard cancer potency factor (CPF) established by OEHHA for DPM was used to estimate potential carcinogenic health effects from exposures to DPM emitted from vehicles on SR 20/49. The CPF for DPM is derived by applying conservative assumptions that are intended to protect the most sensitive individuals in the potentially exposed populations. To derive the CPF toxicity value for DPM, OEHHA makes several assumptions that tend to overestimate the actual hazard or risk to human health. CPFs used to estimate carcinogenic risk are also typically derived based on data from animal studies. These studies often administer high doses of a test chemical to laboratory animals, and the reported response is extrapolated to the much lower doses typical of human exposure.
Very little experimental data are available on the nature of the dose-response relationship at low doses (e.g. whether a threshold exists or if the dose-response curve passes through the origin). Because of this uncertainty, a conservative model is used to estimate the low-dose relationship, and uses an upper bound estimate (the 95 upper confidence limit of the slope predicted by the extrapolation model) as the CPF. With this factor, an upper-bound estimate of potential cancer risks is calculated.
The CPF for DPM (1.1 milligrams/kilograms-day) was used to estimate cancer risks associated with exposure to DPM from Project operation. However, the CPF is highly uncertain in both the estimation of response and dose. Due to inadequate animal test data and epidemiology data on diesel exhaust, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a branch of the World Health Organization (WHO), had previously classified DPM as Probably Carcinogenic to Humans (Group 2). The IARC currently classifies diesel engine exhaust as “carcinogenic to humans,” based on sufficient evidence that it is linked to an increased risk of lung cancer. IARC also notes that there is “some evidence of a positive association” between diesel exhaust and bladder cancer. Notably, the EPA classifies diesel exhaust as “likely to be carcinogenic to humans.” This determination by the IARC may provide additional impetus for the EPA to identify a quantitative dose-response relationship between exposure to DPM and cancer.
Risk Calculations
Estimated risks in the HRA are based primarily on a series of conservative assumptions related to predicted environmental concentrations, exposure, and chemical toxicity. The use of conservative assumptions tends to produce upper-bound estimates of risk. The use of conservative assumptions is likely to result in overestimated
Item # 11.
2 – AIR QUALITY
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 2-23
exposure and therefore health risk, although it is difficult to quantify the uncertainties associated with all the assumptions made in the HRA.
2.4 Impact Analysis
Impact 2.4.1 Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
Health Impacts of Operational Toxic Air Contaminants
Based on the 30-year exposure scenario, the MEIR for cancer risk would be at the Golden Empire Nursing and Rehab Center which is adjacent to SR 20/49, located north of the Project site. The results of the HRA for each of the proposed scenarios (baseline, baseline + Project with 100% ADT added to SR 20/49, baseline + Project with 20% of ADT added to SR 20/49,cumulative 2035, cumulative 2035 + Project with 100% ADT added to SR 20/49, and cumulative + Project with 20% of ADT added to SR 20/49) are summarized in Tables 2-6 and 2-7, below. The results based on the assumption that 100% of the project-generated ADT (approximately 8,873 vehicle trips) would be added to SR 20/49 represents a worst-case scenario while the results based on the assumption that 20% of the project-generated ADT (approximately 1,775 vehicle trips) reflects the trip distribution analysis presented in the Transportation Impact Analysis Report prepared for the project, which was provided in Appendix G of the 2019 Draft EIR.
Table 2-6. Summary of Maximum Cancer and Chronic Health Risks and PM2.5 Concentrations (Baseline Scenario)
Impact Parameter Units Risk
CEQA
Threshold
Level of
Significance
Baseline
Cancer Risk Per Million 22.02 10 Potentially Significant Chronic Hazard Index Index Value 0.01 1.0 Less than Significant PM2.5 Concentration
(µg/m3)
μg/m3 0.16 0.3 Less than Significant
Baseline + Project with 100% ADT added to SR 20/49
Cancer Risk Per Million 27.38 10 Potentially Significant Chronic Hazard Index Index Value 0.02 1.0 Less than Significant PM2.5 Concentration
(µg/m3)
μg/m3 0.20 0.3 Less than Significant
Project with 100% ADT added to SR 20/49 Impact (Baseline + 100% Project ADT minus Baseline) Cancer Risk Per Million 5.36 10 Less than Significant
Chronic Hazard Index Index Value 0.01 1.0 Less than Significant PM2.5 Concentration
(µg/m3)
μg/m3 0.04 0.3 Less than Significant
Baseline + Project with 20% ADT added to SR 20/49
Cancer Risk Per Million 22.19 10 Potentially Significant Chronic Hazard Index Index Value 0.01 1.0 Less than Significant PM2.5 Concentration
(µg/m3)
μg/m3 0.23 0.3 Less than Significant
Item # 11.
2 – AIR QUALITY
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 2-24
Project with 20 % ADT added to SR 20/49 Impact (Baseline + 20% Project ADT minus Baseline) Cancer Risk Per Million 0.17 10 Less than Significant
Chronic Hazard Index Index Value <0.01 1.0 Less than Significant PM2.5 Concentration
(µg/m3)
μg/m3 0.01 0.3 Less than Significant
Source: Appendix O.
Notes: CEQA = California Environmental Quality Act; HRA = Health Risk Assessment 1 The Golden Empire Nursing and Rehab Center which is located adjacent to SR 20/49 was conservatively assumed to be the MEIR, though patients would not be considered residents with a 30-year exposure duration. Furthermore, this facility for seniors specifically, would not have the 3rd trimester start of exposure. Furthermore, the nursing facility would install MERV-14 filters per the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air-Conditioning Engineers or the filter with the highest compatible filtering efficiency depending on the existing HVAC system. Use of such filters was not included in the assessment and would serve to lower the indoor exposure to particulate matter and associated health risks.
Table 2-7. Summary of Maximum Cancer and Chronic Health Risks and PM2.5 Concentrations (Cumulative Scenario)
Impact Parameter Units Risk
CEQA
Threshold
Level of
Significance
Cumulative 2035
Cancer Risk Per Million 23.56 10 Potentially Significant Chronic Hazard Index Index Value 0.01 1.0 Less than Significant PM2.5 Concentration
(µg/m3)
μg/m3 0.18 0.3 Less than Significant
Cumulative 2035 + 100% Project ADT
Cancer Risk Per Million 28.92 10 Potentially Significant Chronic Hazard Index Index Value 0.02 1.0 Less than Significant PM2.5 Concentration
(µg/m3)
μg/m3 0.22 0.3 Less than Significant
100% ADT Project Impact (Cumulative + 100% Project ADT minus Cumulative) Cancer Risk Per Million 5.36 10 Less than Significant
Chronic Hazard Index Index Value 0.01 1.0 Less than Significant PM2.5 Concentration
(µg/m3)
μg/m3 0.04 0.3 Less than Significant
Cumulative 2035 + Project with 20% ADT added to SR 20/49 Cancer Risk Per Million 23.73 10 Potentially Significant Chronic Hazard Index Index Value 0.01 1.0 Less than Significant PM2.5 Concentration
(µg/m3)
μg/m3 0.25 0.3 Less than Significant
Project with 20 % ADT added to SR 20/49 Impact (Cumulative + 20% Project ADT minus Baseline) Cancer Risk Per Million 0.17 10 Less than Significant
Chronic Hazard Index Index Value <0.01 1.0 Less than Significant PM2.5 Concentration
(µg/m3)
μg/m3 0.01 0.3 Less than Significant
Source: Appendix O.
Notes: CEQA = California Environmental Quality Act; HRA = Health Risk Assessment 1 The Golden Empire Nursing and Rehab Center which is located adjacent to SR 20/49 was conservatively assumed to be the MEIR, though patients would not be considered residents with a 30-year exposure duration. Furthermore, this facility for seniors specifically, would not have the 3rd trimester start of exposure. Furthermore, the nursing facility would install MERV-14 filters per the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air-Conditioning Engineers or the filter with the highest compatible filtering efficiency depending on the
Item # 11.
2 – AIR QUALITY
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 2-25
existing HVAC system. Use of such filters was not included in the assessment and would serve to lower the indoor exposure to particulate matter and associated health risks.
As depicted in Tables 2-6 and 2-7, for the existing scenario, the maximum potential cancer risk within the Project area from on-road vehicle exhaust along SR 20/49 would be approximately 22.02 in a million and in the cumulative 2035 scenario the maximum potential cancer risk within the Project area from on-road vehicle exhaust along SR 20/49 would be approximately 23.56 in a million. These risk levels reflect the baseline conditions that are present or will be present in the area without the addition of Project-generated traffic.
For the existing + 100% Project ADT scenario, the maximum potential cancer risk within the project area from onroad vehicle exhaust along SR 20/49 would be approximately 27.38 in a million and for the cumulative 2035 + 100% Project ADT scenario, the maximum potential cancer risk within the Project area from on-road vehicle exhaust along SR 20/49 would be approximately 28.92 in a million. Therefore, assuming 100% of the Project ADT is added to SR 20/49, the maximum potential increase in cancer risk due to the Project would be approximately 5.36 in a million at the MEIR5 (or a potential increase of 0.000536%), which represents the estimated delta between the baseline and baseline + Project or the cumulative 2035 and cumulative 2035 + Project scenarios, which includes Project-generated vehicle travel. The maximum chronic hazard and the maximum PM2.5 concentration would be below the thresholds for each of the modeled scenarios (baseline, baseline + 100% Project ADT, cumulative 2035, and cumulative 2035 + 100% Project ADT).6
The HRA modeling found that when 20% of the Project’s total trip generation is added to SR 20/49, under the existing + 20% Project ADT scenario, the maximum potential cancer risk within the Project area from on-road vehicle exhaust along SR 20/49 would be approximately 22.19 in a million and for the cumulative 2035 + 20% Project ADT scenario, the maximum potential cancer risk within the Project area from on-road vehicle exhaust along SR 20/49 would be approximately 23.73 in a million.
Therefore, assuming a 20% trip distribution on SR 20/49, the maximum potential increase in cancer risk due to the Project would be approximately 0.17 in a million at the MEIR (or a potential increase of 0.77%), which represents the estimated the delta between the baseline and baseline + 20% Project ADT or the cumulative 2035 and cumulative 2035 + 20% Project ADT scenarios, which includes Project-generated vehicle travel. The maximum chronic hazard and the maximum PM2.5 concentration would be below the thresholds for each of the modeled scenarios (baseline, baseline + Project, cumulative 2035, and cumulative 2035 + Project).
As such, the future residents and occupants at the Project site and sensitive receptors within 1,000 feet of SR 20/49 would be exposed to less than significant cancer, chronic, as well as PM2.5 concentrations due to traffic generated by the Project. In other words, mobile source emissions from Project generated traffic would not significantly exacerbate an existing or future environmental hazard. While Project generated traffic would increase 5 The MEIR is a nursing facility located adjacent to SR 20/49. Healthcare settings are recommended to install MERV-14 filters, which can theoretically remove at least 75% of dust, pollen, mold, bacteria, and any airborne particles with a size of 0.3 µm, which would further reduce potential health impacts. Notably, if MERV-14 filters are not compatible with the existing HVAC system, the facility would use filters with the highest compatible filtering efficiency. The recommendation for MERV-14 filtration is based on updated recommendations for healthcare settings from the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air-Conditioning Engineers.
6 For context, as mentioned in Section 2.3.1, the National Cancer Institute estimates that approximately 39.5% of people will be diagnosed with cancer during their lifetimes (National Cancer Institute 2020). This equates to a baseline rate of about 39 cancer cases in 100 people. As identified by the American Association for Cancer Research, approximately 40% of all cancers (or about 16 cancer cases in 100 people) are associated with lifestyle behaviors, including smoking tobacco, excess body weight, unhealthy dietary patterns, alcohol intake, and physical activity (American Association for Cancer Research 2023).
Item # 11.
2 – AIR QUALITY
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 2-26
emissions and associated health effects from SR 20/49 under current and 2035 conditions, the additional cancer risk of five in one million associated with the 100% Project ADT scenario is not a significant exacerbation of the baseline cancer risk from mobile source emissions on SR 20/49 under current or 2035 conditions. Similarly, the additional cancer risk of 0.17 in one million associated with the 20% Project ADT scenario is not a significant exacerbation of the baseline cancer risk from mobile source emissions on SR 20/49 under current or 2035 conditions. As discussed above, the HRA applies BAAQMD’s thresholds to mobile source emissions from Project generated traffic and the associated health effects on future residents and occupants in determining whether the Project would significantly exacerbate health risks from mobile source emissions on SR 20/49. Because the Project’s contribution would not exceed BAAQMD’s thresholds (ten in one million), the Project does not significantly exacerbate the environmental hazard associated with SR 20/49 now or in 2035.
It should be noted, moreover, that the Project would be consistent with the City’s land use and General Plan goals for the area including providing a mixed-use development, including multifamily residential housing and commercial shopping opportunities within the City. Other activities in which the future residents, workers, and visitors could be exposed to health concentrations exceeding the applied thresholds would be due exposure to stationary sources such as dry cleaners, gas stations, and generators. Adverse health effects from these sources could also include carcinogenic (i.e., cancer-causing) and noncarcinogenic effects. Additionally, although traffic volumes were conservatively assumed to increase with time due to growth, vehicular emission factors are expected to decrease with time due to California’s Statewide regulation to increase fuel efficiency (Assembly Bill 1493, the Pavley I standard) and other State and federal regulations aimed at vehicles emissions reduction, including the requirement to gradually phase out the sale of gas-powered vehicles by 2035.
Further, there are several Project Design Features, as included in the 2019 EIR, that implement recommendations discussed in CARB’s Technical Advisory: Strategies to Reduce Air Pollution Exposure Near High-Volume Roadways (2017, hereafter referred to as the CARB Technical Advisory), which would help reduce the potential health effects on future residents, workers, and visitors:
Mitigation Measure 9a requires that a 6-foot-tall sound wall be constructed in the southwestern portion of the project site, between the residences proposed in that portion of the site and SR 20/49.
The CARB Technical Advisory notes that vertical dispersion of pollutants, such as occurs when a solid wall is placed between the roadway and residents has been shown to reduce the concentration of TACs. The research cited in the CARB Technical Advisory includes a “field study in Phoenix, AZ—which measured NO2, CO, UFP [ultrafine particulate matter], and black carbon (BC) using both a mobile platform and fixed sites— found that pollutant concentrations behind the roadside barriers were significantly lower relative to those measured in the absence of barriers. The reductions ranged from 50% within 50 meters (~164 feet) from the barrier to about 30% as far as 300 meters (984 feet) from the barrier” (CARB 2017). The proposed site plan includes a minimum 50-foot-wide buffer between the Dorsey Drive off-ramp and the onsite parking lots. This area would be landscaped in accordance with Mitigation Measure 5a, which includes specific performance standards regarding the density and height of vegetation.
The CARB Technical Advisory also reports on studies showing that landscaping placed between the roadway and residents can reduce exposure to TACs. This includes a study where vegetation screen separating a freeway in Davis, California from a nearby elementary school was modeled. “The modeling showed that— with the tree configurations studied—74% of PM impacted a tree surface. This means that the particles did not merely pass by the tree, but rather impacted and may have deposited on the tree itself (CARB 2017).
Item # 11.
2 – AIR QUALITY
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 2-27
Another study found “the combination of vegetation (trees) and soundwalls is associated with a reduction in BC [black carbon], UFP [ultrafine particulate matter], and NO [nitrogen oxide] concentrations, when ideal or perpendicular wind conditions are present. The concentration reductions vary from 4.8% to 28%, depending on the location and wind conditions. The study looked at many wind conditions outside of the simple perpendicular wind pattern and found that the soundwall/tree combination barrier may have little or no effect in very high wind cases and in parallel wind cases” (CARB 2017). This study supports the use of a sound wall and vegetation screening to minimize air pollutant exposures, including exposure to TACs, within the Project site because predominant wind direction in Grass Valley is from the south and from the east, i.e., not blowing emissions from SR 20/49 towards the Project site, which the HRA assessment accounts for per the most recent obtained meteorological data (Weatherspark 2020). In addition, per the CARB Handbook, it is recommended that that the siting of new sensitive land uses should be avoided immediately downwind freeways and high traffic roadways. As discussed above, SR 20/49 is not a high traffic roadway under the CARB Handbook under current or 2035 conditions. The Project, however, complies with CARB’s recommendations because the new sensitive land uses will not be immediately downwind of SR 20/49 (Appendix N).
The proposed buildings nearest SR 20/49 under Alternative B are comprised of two apartment buildings separated by a drive aisle and parking spaces. This creates an open area between the buildings that allows for air flow to disperse pollutants.
The CARB Technical Advisory finds that site design can encourage further air pollutant dispersion, when features such as “building articulations (street frontage design elements like edges and corners that help break up building mass), and spaces that encourage air flow (e.g., parks)” are incorporated (CARB 2017).
2.4.1 Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
2.5 References Cited
13 CCR 2449–2449.3 and Appendix A. General Requirements for In-Use Off-Road Diesel-Fueled Fleets.14 CCR 15000–15387 and Appendices A–L. Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, as amended.
14 CCR 15000–15387 and Appendices A–L. Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, as amended.
17 CCR 93000. Substances Identified as Toxic Air Contaminants. In Subchapter 7, Toxic Air Contaminants.
American Association of Cancer Research. 2023. AACR Cancer Progress Report 2023. https://cancerprogressreport.aacr.org/wpcontent/uploads/sites/2/2023/10/AACR_CPR_2023_102423.pdf BAAQMD (Bay Area Air Quality Management District). 2023. California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines. April 2023. Accessed May 2023.
Item # 11.
2 – AIR QUALITY
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 2-28
Caltrans. 2023. Performance Measurement System (PeMS) Data Source. Accessed September 2023. https://dot.ca.gov/programs/traffic-operations/mpr/pems-source CARB (California Air Resources Board). 1991. Activity Patterns of California Residents. Final Report. May 1991.
CARB. 2000. Risk Reduction Plan to Reduce Particulate Matter Emissions from Diesel-Fueled Engines and Vehicles. October 2000. Accessed May 2019. http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/documents/rrpfinal.pdf.
CARB. 2016. “Ambient Air Quality Standards.” May 4, 2016. http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/aaqs2.pdf.
CARB. 2017. Technical Advisory Strategies to Reduce Air Pollution Exposure Near High-Volume Roadways. April 2017.
CARB. 2019a. “Glossary.” January 2019. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/about/glossary.
CARB. 2019b. “Ozone & Health.” https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/ozone-and-health.
CARB. 2019c. “Nitrogen Dioxide & Health.” https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/nitrogen-dioxide-and-health.
CARB. 2019d. “Carbon Monoxide & Health.” https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/carbon-monoxide-and-health.
CARB. 2019e. “Sulfur Dioxide & Health.” https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/sulfur-dioxide-and-health.
CARB. 2019f. “Overview: Diesel Exhaust and Health.” https://www.arb.ca.gov/research/diesel/diesel-health.htm.
CARB. 2022a. Common Air Pollutants. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/common-air-pollutants CARB. 2022b. “Area Designation Maps/State and National.” http://www.arb.ca.gov/desig/adm/adm.htm.
CARB. 2023a. “Ambient air quality data.” [digital CARB data]. iADAM: Air Quality Data Statistics. https://arb.ca.gov/adam/topfour/topfourdisplay.php.
EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2013. Integrated Science Assessment (ISA) of Ozone and Related Photochemical Oxidants (Final Report, Feb 2013). EPA/600/R-10/076F. February 2013. Accessed May 2019. https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/isa/recordisplay.cfm?deid=247492.
EPA. 2016. Integrated Science Assessment for Oxides of Nitrogen-Health Criteria (2016 Final Report). U.S. EPA, EPA/600/R-15/068, 2016.EPA. 2017. “Climate Change.” Last updated January 19, 2017. Accessed May 2019. https://19january2017snapshot.epa.gov/climatechange.html EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2017. Revisions to the Guideline on Air Quality Models:
Enhancements to the AERMOD Dispersion Modeling System and Incorporation of Approaches To Address Ozone and Fine Particulate Matter. 40 CFR Part 51. January 2017. Accessed August 2023. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2017-01-17/pdf/2016-31747.pdf.
EPA. 2020. “What is MERV Rating?” May 5, 2020. Accessed August 2020. https://www.epa.gov/indoor-airquality-iaq/what-merv-rating-1.
Item # 11.
2 – AIR QUALITY
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 2-29
EPA. 2021. Transportation Conformity Guidance for Quantitative Hotspot Analyses of PM2.5 and PM10 Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas. https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.ci?Dockey=P1013C6A.pdf EPA. 2022a. “Criteria Air Pollutants.” Last updated August 9, 2022. https://www.epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants.
EPA. 2022b. “Region 9: Air Quality Analysis, Air Quality Maps.” http://www.epa.gov/region9/air/maps/.
EPA. 2022c. “AirData: Access to Air Pollution Data.” http://www.epa.gov/airdata/ad_rep_mon.html.
National Cancer Institute. 2020. “Cancer Statistics”. Updated September 2020. https://www.cancer.gov/aboutcancer/understanding/statistics OEHHA (Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment). 2003. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines - The Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments. August 2003. Accessed April 2019.
OEHHA . 2015. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program, Risk Assessment Guidelines, Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments. February 2015.
Weatherspark. 2020. Average Weather in Grass Valley. https://weatherspark.com/y/1178/Average-Weather-inGrass-Valley-California-United-States-Year-Round. Accessed March 12, 2020.
Item # 11.
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 2-30
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Item # 11.
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 3-1
3 List of Preparers
3.1 City of Grass Valley
Amy Wolfson– City Planner
3.2 Dudek
Katherine Waugh, AICP - Project Manager
Jessica Booth, CEQA Analyst
Matthew Morales - Senior Air Quality Specialist
Ian McIntire - Air Quality Specialist
Item # 11.
3 – LIST OF PREPARERS
DORSEY MARKETPLACE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL EIR 9478
FEBRUARY 2024 3-2
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Item # 11.
APPENDIX M
Judgment and Writ of Mandate
Nevada County Superior Court, 2023
Item # 11.
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
©
[PROPOSED] JUDGEMENT FOR WRIT OF MANDATE
SETTING ASIDE ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION
Tal C. Finney, Esq. 156296
Shaune B. Arnold, Esq. 173298
FINNEY ARNOLD LLP
633 W. 5th Street, 28th Floor
Los Angeles, California 90071
[email protected]
(310) 729-7266
[email protected]
(213) 718-3468
R. Bruce Tepper, Esq. 75339
R. BRUCE TEPPER ALC
10551 Wilshire Blvd. #1104
Los Angeles, California 90024-7309
(424) 293-2680
[email protected]
Attorneys for Petitioners,
Community Environmental Advocates,
Community Environmental Advocates Foundation,
Protect Grass Valley and Ralph A. Silberstein
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF NEVADA
COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENTAL
ADVOCATES, COMMUNITY
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVOCATES
FOUNDATION, PROTECT GRASS
VALLEY AND RALPH A.
SILBERSTEIN
Petitioners,
v.
CITY OF GRASS VALLEY,
Respondent;
Superior Court CASE NO.: CU20-084791
(Court of Appeal No. C094613)
[PROPOSED] FOR
WRIT OF MANDATE SETTING ASIDE
ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION
JUDGE: Hon. S. Robert Tice-Raskin
HEARING: August 11, 2023
TIME: 10:00 a.m.
DEPT: 6
Date Action Filed: August 3, 2020
RUSSELL JETER AS TRUSTEE OF R.
JETER FAMILY TRUST [FORMERLY
THE R JETER FAMILY TRUST].
Real Party in Interest.
JUDGMENT
Item # 11.
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
©
[PROPOSED] JUDGEMENT FOR WRIT OF MANDATE
SETTING ASIDE ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION
-2-
Petitioners, Community Environmental Advocates, Community Environmental Advocates Foundation, Protect Grass Valley, and Ralph A. Silberstein (“Petitioners”) filed a Verified Petition for Writ of Mandate on August 3, 2020 (“Petition”). After briefing by Petitioners, the City of Grass Valley (“Respondent”) and Russell Jeter as Trustee of the R Jeter Family Trust as the Real Party in Interest (“RPI” and together with Respondent, “Respondents”), and following a hearing on the merits, on March 26, 2021, the Trial Court found in favor of Respondents.
Judgment was entered on the matter in favor of Respondents, on July 27, 2021. Petitioners timely filed a Notice of Appeal on July 29, 2021. Oral arguments were held on the Appeal on November 15, 2022.
On January 30, 2023, the Court of Appeal issued its decision in this matter (“Appellate Decision”), reversing the Trial Court’s Judgment and directing the Trial Court to enter a new Judgment granting the Petition. Respondents filed a Joint Petition for Rehearing on February 14, 2023 (“Petition for Rehearing”), which Petition for Rehearing was denied. On February 28, 2023, the Court of Appeal modified its Appellate Decision (“Modified Opinion”), directing the Trial Court to grant the Petition, in part, and permitting the Trial Court to exercise its discretion as to whether severance findings under Pub. Resources Code § 21168.9(b) could be made.
Respondents filed a Joint Motion for Severance and for Limited Remedy on May 8, 2023 (“Severance Motion”). The Severance Motion was heard in the within Court, on August 11, 2023, Petitioners being present in person and being represented by R. Bruce Tepper, of R. BRUCE TEPPER, ALC, and Tal Finney, of FINNEY ARNOLD, LLP, their counsel, Respondent being represented by Meghan A. Wharton, of COLANTUONO, HIGHSMITH & WHATLEY, PC, its counsel, and Real Party in Interest (“RPI”) being represented by James G. Moose and Nathan O.
George, of REMY MOOSE MANLEY, LLP. On August 23, 2023, the Trial Court issued an Order Denying Respondents’ Joint Motion for Severance and for Limited Remedy.
The Record of Proceedings having been considered and the matter argued and submitted, and good cause appearing therefor,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED THAT:
1. Respondent City and RPI shall comply with this Court’s Order denying the Severance Motion.